The URL can be used to link to this page

2012-34 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 34 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2012 LAKE COUNITY ALL NATURAL HAZARDS MITIGATION PLAN WHEREAS, one of the most irriportant missions of the Village of'Buffalo Gro�c is to protect the life, health and safety of the residents of the Village; and, WHEREAS, adoption of an All Notural Hazard.s, iVitigation Plan is required for the Village of Buffalo Grove to be eligible to receive state or federal mitigation funding, such as flood prone property buy-outs or improvements, and, WHEREAS, Lake County and the Village of Buffalo Grose are subject to flooding, tornadoes, severe summer and winter storms and other natural hazards that can damage properties, close businesses, disrupt traffic and present a public health and safety hazard; and, WHEREAS, the Village of Buffalo Grove participated in the Lake County Local Planning Committee, which committee has prepared a recommended 2012 update of the llci:ords Mihguiim Pkvl� dlo rl',vie%vs 1he OpHons lc� protect people and reduce damage from hazards-, and, WHEREAS, Lake County and Lake County municipalities prepared and adopted the 2000 Lake t ewowtv All \,"amral 11Xurrd Jhligaliotl phm and dic 10 12 take Ccawa�), ,,V/ A'atural Hazards Wiligation Plan is an update required by the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and, WHEREAS, the 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan was developed as a multi-jurisdictional plan has been submitted and approved by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency-, and WHEREAS, the recommended 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan has been widely circulated for review by residents and federal, state, and regional agencies and has been supported by those reviewers; and, WHEREAS, the preparation and adoption of a community mitigation plan is a requirement of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in order for Lake County and Buffalo Grove to be eligible for federal mitigation funds under Section 104 of' the Disaster Mitigation Act of' 2000 (42 USC 5165), and under 44 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 201, NOW', THEREFORE Bl by the ViHaoe President and Board of Trustees ofthe Village offfiiffalo Grove, Lake arld Co(uk Countles, Hh-nm's, that,,- 1 . Fhe 20,12 Lake County All Nalural Ha-zard,s Maigo(ion I'lan, 'is herebN adopted as an official plan of the ViHu�,'Ye of'Buffialo (Irrove. I Gregory Boysen is herebY aploolinted as the VdIage's representative on IIiL Lake COUIIJty Local Planning Committee and he NmH keep the VdIage apprised of the mitigation actiori iierns undertaken b) or reporled to the Lake County Local Planning Committee. 3, The Village Clerk is hereby requested to dlstrubute a cenifir,.,.d copy of this Resolution to the I.,ake County Storryiwater Management Commission. XYES` ......6—Berman, Trill-- so . Stein. O.ttenheirne.1Sussrjer .... NAYES; e-0 Non . .. ........................... ABSEINT: 0 None I'll.............................. ....... PASSED- October 1... 2012 ... .... APPROVM October J-1--.-----.--. 2012 A P P R 0\,r F"D- 'll, -e President ATTESTI, Village Clerk G WW D R(jRII'A.HC+MAIRes 2M2 docx 2 r o" /r r r r r r r t coll./ /r r v, i r /ir j w r Garr%-• / //gowl r�i�%;, %/„ J ,, � � �%��/ rim % // ��/� �///fir/i✓Jr iJ//jl// ,r//i�///��i��i//// 4p i r rr rrr r ri / �/ /„ a r rrr/// /�//✓� r ,%%/ / // r Aei ,jW/� P// i ban J Wm', �Or�a r� ✓ r/r J// - /�rd%//%�k /��%d�`Y ��/ / ;✓/;% sir/r✓�'Fy/�/, ir0%few/�/��',r�r/✓; �/1„ r, � ,r<: %re,,o„ /l �v ' � a �l�I��l/ir✓i,/r, „ .,,1 � '� �� /%�ri/r/r %r�P�,rA, ��//��iJr. ��%ij;,%/'r � ,,., ;� /�Ir!fr '�� i�' r��. �/� �%.,1J �/ � 1 /% rr r/ ,` / ,r. r..or��i/ r•.,//iJ 1�J.i:. J�f ,,+ lkGl�//G,✓/,,/////� ,%�r/,r r,a, r,yaii r „ r,„ fa r/ // r ,�,,, �sif�/,, ,,,%/ /� /��ir f, J''Ill%%fir(%�/ ,....,�, J '„ JJr'rir r,,,�/ �/i yyrJ/%/l%/r ;,, /f��///l✓% /'r„ �y��/�U/�%%��/r�/�/��%%�(%•%%yr%//�ir,,rJr ,,r' '/,Jr�j rl�/yrR�'ii%; a/rl✓�'�%//�%l��r ��i/�%/%/lr///, r d-,✓rl��fi/1/�/�Jr�,A�/, u��l✓�/�/�/f!!//r�/ii�%/�%J/%��%/ ,::/ri,��PrJ/ ��,/�////r� ,,, �, ' ,' ,,% .r rrr„+,. o- r/l��//,;,/ ! :./,r /✓,r//i.r/�r,r,� �i �/.�ir/�/l //�/�/ r ../ r ��%/ ,.,// � r//.r,,. r.,.,.r / /� /ir��//,„ /,. �r/.. ✓/% /f� r r!rii , ,r rrr„ /. ,,J r. ,rrc r./I r .; X /,/� .,., _// r ,,, / r✓tr// ,l�i r �,A/.r/v/,ir i% „�/ �/ / �//,, y/ ,r, l/r l�,.�... ,�� . 4. >l I r��r r///�/I�or r�A;,� f/�// r r�r( J/ i/o,l �� A//,� /r r / 71, � ,. ,�� ».. 4.� i,.,.m.� A /rii r r/Ar /� /��/ i��1 �J ��',-/ (!r/,//,�/�✓/��/rfr/..,�fr/.�//yr;:: %„ r ;/ar r �%ri / j �✓'� r�%/�r �j�i//�/r�/i//i f ✓//I/r/�j// ��r a�jfr% ' �,,,,, �,/�,,, ,» G ,,,r,,,a,//.ri,,,,r�/ r/�,:wr�s�� //r�„�i/r,l/r✓�drr ., ✓iuG.�»�a✓a, ,c mmawwm u r �mm�mwurou t , u ! � a Lake County All Natural Hazards Imtgationi June 2012 Developed by: Lake County Local Planning Committee Coordinated by: Lake County Stormwater Management Commission and the Lake County Emergency Management Agency Planning Consultant: Molly O'Toole &Associates, Ltd. With Technical Assistance Provided by Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan �Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table of Contents June 2012 ExecutiveSummary....................................................................................................ES-1 Chapter1 Introduction..................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of the Plan.......... ......... ......... ......... .............--.........,, ......I....... 1-2 1.2 Organization of the Plan--.—.. ....... ................... .,.,.,.,....... ............,.,.... 1-2 1.3 Lake County Overview.... .......................... 1-3 1.4 Land Use and Development ...... ........ ......... ........ . ...... ......... ............ 1-12 1.5 Critical Facilities .. .,........ ......... .....w,.. .....,,.. .,.....,. , ..,. .......... 1-18 Chapter2 Planning Process.........................................................................................2-1 2.1 Planning Approach. ......... ....... ......... ......... ........................,..,.. .........-....,2-1 2.2 Update Process— ........ ......... ......... ....... ............................,,...........,,..,.2-2 2.3 Plan Adoption and Implementation....... y-- ........ ......... ...............2-7 2.4 Summary of Major Changes to the ANHMP................................................2-7 Chapter 3 Risk Assessment..........................................................................................3-1 3.1 Natural Hazards in Lake County........... ......... ........ ........-3-1 3.2 Summary of Lake County Assets ..................................................................3-4 3.3 Flood.. ....... ............... .. .... ................ ......... .................. ..........................3-7 3.4 Tornado.......... ............ ....... ...... ......... ................ . ......,..... ................3-28 3.5 Severe Summer Storms.... ...... , ....................3-37 3.6 Severe Winter Storms................ ...... ..... ,,.,..,...,..3-48 3.7 Drought................. ..-..... .,,....... ........ .....,... ...,.,.,,,.,.... ., ,.,...,,, .,..,........3-53 3.8 Earthquake ............---..............................---...... ......-.........................3-57 3.9 Dam Failure ... ...... ......... ......... ........ ......... ......... .„...............................3-61 3.10 Extreme Temperatures.... ..,.,.... ...,.,.. ...... ........ ......... ........ 3-66 3.11 Erosion................. .......................,,,...,.......... ,. ... ............3-72 3.12 Summary of Natural Hazards Risk Assessment.......................................3-74 Chapter 4 Mitigation Goals .........................................................................................4-1 4.1 Community Priorities and Plan Direction............... 4-1 4.2 Goals and Guidelines................. ........ ......... ......... ......... ........ ,,.........4-2 4.3 Consideration of Other Plans..... ......... ...................4-3 Lake County ANHMP G June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategies and Capabilities Assessment................M-..................5-1 5.1 Preventive Measures....................,,,, ........ . ..,... ........, ......,. 5-2 5.1.1 Planning and Zoning 5.1.2 Watershed Development Regulations 5.1.3 Best Management Practices 5.1.4 Building Codes 5.1.5 Standards for Manufactured Homes 5.1.6 Critical Facility Construction 5.1.7 Other Preventive Measures 5.1.8 Preventive Measure Recommendations 5.2 Property Protection.................................... ...... ......... , ,....., ..,....,......a,5-14 5.2.1. Building Acquisition/Relocation 5.2.2, Building Elevation, Floodproofing or Barriers 5.2.3, Building Structural Retrofitting 5.2.4. Insurance 5.2.5 Repetitive Flood Loss Properties 5.2.6 Property Protection Recommendations 5.3 Natural Resource Protection.............................................w,..,..,......,.....,..... 5-28 5.3.1 Open Space Preservation 5.3.2. Wetland Protection Regulations & Soil Erosion and Sediment Control 5.3.3. Stream Restoration 5.3.4. Groundwater Protection 5.3.5. Urban Forestry 5.3.6. Historic and Natural Area Protection 5.3.7 Resource Protection Recommendations 5.4 Emergency Services....................................................................................5-35 5.4.1 Emergency Planning 5.4.2 Threat Recognition 5.4.3 Warning 5.4.4 Response 5.4.5 Critical Facility Operation 5.4.6 Recovery and Mitigation 5.4.7 Emergency Services Recommendations 5.5 Structural Measures ................................... ........,.,............,....,..,..........5-44 5.5.1 Watershed Planning 5.5.2. Regional Flood Control 5.5.3. Management of Existing Dams 5.5.4. Improving Crossings and Roadways 5.5.5. Drainage System Maintenance 5.5.6 Structural Measure Recommendations Lake County ANHMP ii June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.6 Public Information Activities.......................... .......... ......,, .,.,.,.. ............ 5-49 5.6.1 Library and Website Resources 5.6.2 Outreach Projects 5.6.3 Technical Assistance 5.6.4 Public Information Recommendations 5.7 Capability Assessment Summary........ ......... .... ... 5-53 Chapter 6 Action Plan and Implementation Strategy...............................................6-1 6.1 Development of Current Action Plan ...........................................................6-1 6.2 Lake County ANHMP Action Items.............................................................6-3 6.3 Implementation Strategy............................................................................-6-17 Chapter7 Plan Maintenance.......................................................................................7-1 7.1 Plan Adoption.................................................................................. ............ 7-1 7.2 Maintenance and Monitoring..... ......... ......... ...... .............. 7-1 7.3 Continued Public Participation..................................a,.w.,................,.. .......... 7-2 7.4 Evaluating the Plan's Success.... ......... ........ ....... ......... 7-2 Appendices Appendix A. Participation Annex 1 to the ANHMP Appendix B. Public Information Activities Items Sample Public Information Materials Summary of"Survey Monkey"Findings Frequently Asked Question About the ANHMP Appendix C. Progress on 2006 Action Plan and Comparison to Current Action Plan Appendix D: Resolutions and FEMA Approval List of Exhibits Exhibit 1-1 Lake County Municipalities.......................... ......... ........ ......... ............... 1-1 Exhibit 1-2 Lake County Townships..................... ...----...... ......... ......... ............... 1-2 Exhibit 1-3 Lake County Elementary School Districts...,,...., .................... „,. 1-10 Exhibit 1-4 Lake County High School Districts............... .................. .,„...,. .........,.., 1-11 Exhibit 1-5 Lake County 2005 Current Land Use.....................- ......,, .,..,............,.... 1-15 Lake County ANHMP i1i June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan w Exhibit 1-6 Lake County Future Land Use ................. .. ...... ........ ........ ............... 1-16 Exhibit 1-7 Lake County Critical Facilities ..............................................................— 1-19 Exhibit 3-1 Lake County Watersheds and Subwatersheds .... .....................................3-10 Exhibit 3-2 Lake County 100 Year Floodplain and Floodway.....................................3-17 Exhibit 3-3 Lake County"Flood Problem Areas".......................................„,.,.,.,,,..,. 3-19 Exhibit 3-4 Lake County Repetitive Flood Loss Areas.................................,...,...,..,....3-23 Exhibit 3-5 Lake County Tornado Touch Downs...,.... ,....... ,.d,..........3-33 Exhibit 3-6 Lake County Hail over 0.75" ..................................................µ,.,,,,,,..,,.,...3-40 Exhibit 3-7 Lake County Lightning Events............... ,,,..,.,..,..........,......................3-44 Exhibit 3-8 Lake County Dams ...,. ...,............... ......... .. ...... .. .—... . .......3-65 Exhibit 5-1 Lake County Lake SMC Flood Audit, Floodplain Buyout Locations,..,...5-16 Exhibit 5-2 Lake County Wetlands...............................................................................5-31 List of Tables Table 1-1 Lake County Township Population Data ...................................................... 1-7 Table 1-2 Lake County Municipalities Population Data...,,,.,.., , .........1-7 Table 1-3 2005 Land Use ...................................................—.....................,.,,,......„...... 1-13 Table 1-4 Planned Future Land Uses ..................................................................--..... 1-14 Table 1-5 All Lake County Critical Facilities .............................................................. 1-18 Table 1-6 Lake County Critical Facilities Located in the 100-year Floodplain............ 1-18 Table 2-1 Local Planning Committee Communities and Representatives .....................2-3 Table 2-2 Summary of Major Changes in ANHMP ................................... ............4,...,.2-8 Table 3-1 Defined Risk Assessment Terms....................................................................3-1 Table 3-2 Local Planning Committee Hazard Exercise Ranking................................... 3-2 Table 3-3 Presidential Disaster(DR)And Emergency Declarations (EM) InLake County ...........................................................................................„„3-2 Table 3-4 Evaluation Of Hazards For Inclusion In 2011 Risk Assessment ,.w,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,3-4 Table 3-5 Summary of Lake County Assets ,... .,..,... ......,....,........,..,,,..3-5 Table 3-6 Summary of Lake County Buildings and Building Value..........„„,,,...„,..,.......3-6 Table 3-7 Fox River Watershed in Lake County.................................. 3-13 Table 3-8 Des Plaines River Watershed in Lake County.............................................3-14 Table 3-9 North Branch of the Chicago River Watershed in Lake County... ..—-3-15 Table 3-10 Lake Michigan Watersheds in Lake County..............................................3-15 Lake County ANHMP iv June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-11 Floodplain Land Use ...... ....... ....... .. ..... ., .....,,.. ....3-16 Table 3-12 Lake County Estimate of Flood Prone Land .............................................3-16 Table 3-13 Lake County Flood Problem Area Inventory Summary......, .....----.....3-18 Table 3-14 Lake County Flood Insurance Active Policies and Claims, FEMA 2011.3-20 Table 3-15 Lake County Repetitive Loss Structures....................................................3-21 Table 3-16 Lake County Repetitive Flood Loss Area Numbers and Names................3-22 Table 3-17 "Flood Audited"Repetitive Loss Properties in Lake County....................3-24 Table 3-18 Past Occurring Flood Events In Lake County, National Climatic Data Center(NCDC)....................................... ......... .......m. ....,.... .....,....,..3-25 Table 3-19 Structures Located in Lake County Floodplains .......................................3-27 Table 3-20 Estimated Market Value of Structures Located in Lake County Floodplains .........................................----..........................----....... 3-27 Table 3-21 Enhanced Fujita Scale and Associated Damage.........................................3-29 Table 3-22 Institutional Buildings...., ....,.„.. ......... ......... ........ .............3-30 Table 3-23 Educational Institutions (Elementary Schools, High Schools)...................3-30 Table 3-24 Metal Building Systems ....................................................................„........3-31 Table 3-25 Electric Transmission Lines ................ ......... ......... _ ....,, ...3-31 Table 3-26 Lake County Tornado History(1957-2011) (NCDC)................................3-34 Table 3-27 Hail Size Reference............................--......... ....,....................................3-38 Table 3-28 Lake County Hail Events (1963-2011) (NCDC)...............a............,...........3-39 Table 3-29 High Wind Events In Lake County(1960-2011) With Recorded Deaths, Injuries Or Damages (NCDC) ...---.........v,„.,,,a.,W...,...........,.,.,....3-41 Table 3-30 Lightning Strikes In Lake County(1995-2011) (NCDC) ..........................3-43 Table 3-31 Severe Winter Storms In Lake County(1994-2011) (NCDC)-.—,, ...„.....3-50 Table 3-32 Drought Severity Classification .......... ........ , ., ......... .....,,......3-54 Table 3-33 Modified Mercalli Intensity....................................... ................................ 3-57 Table 3-34 Recent Earthquakes In Illinois.................. ........ ......... ......... ............ 3-59 Table 3-35 Class I And II Dams In Lake County.. ........„ 3-64 Table 3-36 Cold Weather Threat Levels....... ........ ......... ........ ,. .....,.,. ........,.,.3-69 Table 3-37 Extreme Heat Events In Lake County(1995-2011).,,...,...,„.,....,,,...„....,....3-70 Table 3-38 Extreme Cold Events In Lake County (1996-2011) (NCDC) ................... 3-70 Table 3-39 Summary of Lake County Natural Hazards ...............................................3-75 Table 3-40 Lake County Hazard Identification Summary......................................,....,.3-76 Lake County ANHMP v June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-41 IEMA Hazard Ratings for Lake County..,,,....... ........... .. ........3-77 Table 5-1 Natural Hazard Mitigation Activities............................................................. 5-2 Table 5-2 Lake County Plans and Ordinances.............................. .................................5-5 Table 5-3 Lake County WDO Certified Communities................................................... 5-7 Table 5-4 Lake County Flood Insurance Status............................................................5-24 Table 5-5 Historic Bridges in Lake County.................................... .........,„...........5-34 Table 5-6 NWS Flood Forecast Points ..................,.....,,,,,.,,,,.............,......,,.,.,,.............5-37 Table 5-7 Lake County Flood Response Assignments.................................................5-41 Table 5-8 Flood Control Reservoirs ................................................. .................ro.........5-46 Table 6-1 Summary of 2012 ANHMP Hazard Mitigation Action Items.. ...... 6-18 Table 6-2 Summary of 2012 Action Items and ANHMP Goals..........................-.......6-19 Table C-1 2006 Action Plan Status and 2012 Action Plan Updates....,............................C-2 List of Figures Figure 1-1 Lake County Employment .............................. .. ......... ..,,,.,.. ,. 1-9 Figure 1-2 Lake County 2005 Land Use ..................... „ ..,.,.. ..,...,,. ,..,..... ....... 1-13 Figure 1-3 Lake County Future Land Use Percentiles ................................................. 1-14 Figure2-1 Planning Steps...............................................................................................2-1 Figure 3-1 Description of a Floodplain.............. ....... ...... ......... ........ ., ,......3-7 Figure 3-2 Stratton Lock and Dam................................................................................3-11 Figure 3-3 Operational Constraints Stratton Lock and Dam............ ...„......,..,...W.,.,.....3-12 Figure 3-4 Upper Midwest Wind Zones.. ......... ........ ....... .... 3-42 Figure 3-5 Flash Density Associated With Lightning Strike..... ............ 3-43 Figure 3-6 July 2011 Northern Illinois Storm..........................---.................a,........,...3-46 Figure 3-7 1954 Lake Michigan Seiche—, .... ......... ......... ................3-47 Figure 3-8 "Did You Feel It"Reports for April 18, 2008 Earthquake in Wabash County, Illinois......... ......... . ....a. ........ ..,.,.... ..............3-60 Figure 3-9 NOAA's National Weather Service Heat Index ..........................................3-67 Figure3-10 Wind Chill....................................................—.......,....................................3-68 Figure 5-1 Flood Forecast and Rain and Stream Gage Links........................................5-37 Lake County ANHMP vi June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP i a Executive Summary In 2006, Lake County and participating Lake County municipalities developed and adopted the ` Lake County Countywide All Natural Hazards " Mitigation Plan (ANHMP). The Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA),through the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA - - 2000) and the Stafford Act require that a community develop and adopt a FEMA-approved natural hazard mitigation ANHMP in order to be eligible for hazard mitigation grant funds. DMA 2000 and the Stafford Act require that the mitigation ANHMP be updated and re- adopted every five years to maintain grant eligibility. This 2012 ANHMP is the update of the 2006 ANHMP. The ANHMP is multi jurisdictional, meaning the County and the municipalities must adopt the ANHMP. This ANHMP meets all FEMA planning requirements including those of the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP) Community Rating System(CRS). The ANHMP allows Lake County and the participating communities to receive Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program (HMA) grant funding from FEMA to fund mitigation projects. More can be learned about these programs at: l :/IivyN w.lei�iia.L� v/ o�lei-nmeiit/°,rantJli a`/iti l � slittil. CRS allows participating communities to earn credit towards discounts in flood insurance premiums. "Hazard mitigation is defined as While this ANHMP meets federal planning any sustained action taken to requirements, it has also been prepared to protect life, reduce or eliminate long-term health and safety, and to reduce damage to property and risk to life and property from a infrastructure from natural hazards. This ANHMP hazard event." assesses the natural hazards that affect Lake County, FEMA sets mitigation goals, considers mitigation efforts currently being implemented, evaluates additional mitigation strategies, and recommends mitigation actions to be implemented over the next five years. The mitigation actions are designed to protect the people and assets of Lake County, and designed to be undertaken by both the public and the private sectors. ANHMP Development The ANHMP update was conducted with the input of the Lake County Local Planning Committee (LPC), which includes Lake County departments and agencies, Lake County municipalities and other stakeholders. The LPC has been in place since the development of the 2006 ANHMP and has been meeting annually. The efforts of the LPC were coordinated by the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission(SMC) and Lake County Emergency Management Agency(LCEMA). Executive Summary ES-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Lake County, Illinois, is subject to natural hazards that threaten the life, health, and safety of residents and visitors. Natural hazards have caused extensive property damage throughout the County and can be expected to cause more damage in the future. In recent years: Major flood events struck the County in 1979, 1982, 1986, 1993, 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008; Sixteen tornadoes have touched down since 1957; Severe thunderstorm, high winds, hail and rain impacted the County in 1996, 1998, 2002, 2007 and 2011 Severe winter storms impacted the residents in 1999, 2000, 2008; 4 i Wildfires burned acreage in 2003 and 2005; and J Extreme heat impacted the young and the elderly in 1999. The update of the ANHMP was based on discussion and data provided by the participating municipalities as they followed the recommended 10-step planning process, and through the combination of the 2006 ANHMP and the 2004 Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan. An ANHMP introduction and a description of the planning process are presented in Chapters 1 and 2. Natural hazards that can impact Lake County have been assessed in Chapter 3. Goals and guidelines established by the LPC are presented in Chapter 4. Six mitigation strategies and a capabilities assessment of Lake County are examined in Chapter 5. The ANHMP action plan is detailed in Chapter 6, and procedures for monitoring and maintaining this ANHMP are included in Chapter 7. Chapter Summary Introduction: Lake County is the most northeastern County in Illinois. The County Seat is Waukegan, Illinois. The County is composed of 53 individual communities and 18 townships. The total area of Lake County is approximately 1,368 square miles with a land area of approximately 448 square miles and the rest water. Land in the county generally slopes to the southeast. Lake County is approximately 23.5 miles from north to south. At its widest point, the southern county border, Lake County is approximately 22.6 miles from east to west. Elevations in the county range from 957 feet above sea level to 580 feet above sea level. There are four major watersheds in Lake County: Des Plaines River, Fox River,North Branch of the Chicago River, and Lake Michigan. Lake County has a population of 703,462 and a population density of 1,572 people per square mile, according to the 2010 U.S. Census. Approximately 260,310 housing units exist within the County. Lake County is the third most populated county in Illinois behind Cook County and DuPage County. The Lake County population makes up approximately 5.5% of the total population in the State of Illinois. Executive Summary ES-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP The Narmfiiig Pii ocess The 2009 U.S. Census estimated workforce was 359,335 persons. The County's I step] manufacturing sector employs the most Organize people, accounting for 19.2% of the total step 2 workforce. Other notable sectors include Involve the Public retail trade (13.6%), heath care and social (this step continues throughout the entire process) assistance (11.3%) and finance and Step 3i insurance (7.8%). t Coordinate with Agencies&Organizations (this step continues throughout the entire process) Planning Process• The LPC followed a 1 10-step planning process to update the Stm4 ANHMP. The LPC met four times from Assess the Hazard May to September 2011. The LPC 1 reviewed the hazards and their effects on step s Evaluate the Problem people and property, considered a variety of ways to reduce and prevent damage, and sm 66 recommended the most appropriate and Set Goals feasible measures for implementation. During the development of this ANHMP, Step 7 LCEMA redeveloped the inventory of Review Mitigation Strategies p � critical facilities. Existing plans and Step 8 programs were reviewed during the Draft Action Plan planning process. It should be underscored that this ANHMP does not replace other Step 9 planning efforts, such as community Adopt the Plan comprehensive plans, or the Lake County Step 10 Comprehensive Stormwater Management Implement,Evaluate,Revise Plan. This ANHMP complements those efforts. The public was invited to participate through several concurrent means, including the LPC meetings, online surveys, paper surveys, press releases, newsletter articles, and the Lake County website. A public meeting was held on September 22, 2011 at the Lake County Administration Building in Waukegan, Illinois. The public comment period extended from August 4 to October 4, 2011. Natural Hazard Risk Assessment: The LPC reviewed all potential natural hazards that could impact Lake County, and evaluated them based on their causes, their likelihood of occurring, and their impact on people, property, critical facilities, and the local economy. The information was based on available technical studies and reports by the participating agencies and communities and on their past experiences. The table below shows the natural hazards that are the focus of this ANHMP and provides a summary of the hazards' potential impact on Lake County's health and safety, total assets, and economy from the risk assessment. Executive Summary ES-3 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Summary of Impact on Natural Hazards Impact on Health Impact on Impact on Critical Economic Natural Hazard and Safety Bulldins Facilities Im act Floods Moderate High Moderate High Tornado High High Moderate Moderate Severe Summer Storms Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Severe Winter Storms Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Drought I High Moderate Low Moderate Earthquake Low Low Moderate Low Dam Failure -- Extreme Temperatures High Low Low Low Erosion -- - --All exhibits included in Chapters 3 and 5 will be available on the SMC website. Exhibits can be downloaded at: 4ttl ://www.ak.ecouiityll.Ly av/Stol.m watetµ/Floodlii1orn tioii/`Floo 11°lazardMiti LAtioii/l �tL�es,� l-INIP.a Hazard Mitigation Goals and Guidelines: The 2006 ANHMP` goals were reviewed and the LPC updated the hazard mitigation goals as follows: Goal 1. Protect the lives, health, and safety of the people of Lake County from the impact and effects of natural hazards. Goal 2. Protect public services,utilities and critical facilities from potential damage from natural hazard events. Goal 3: Mitigate existing buildings to protect against damage from natural hazard events. Goal 4. Ensure that new developments do not create new exposures of people and property to damage from natural hazards. Goal 5. Mitigate to protect against economic and transportation losses due to natural hazards. For this update of the ANHMP, the following guidelines were developed by the LPC for the purpose of achieving the goals and to facilitate the development of hazard mitigation action items: Executive Summary ES-4 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Guideline 1. Focus natural hazards mitigation efforts on floods, tornadoes, severe summer and winter storms, dam failure, erosion, extreme temperatures, and drought. Guideline 2. Make people aware of the hazards they face and focus mitigation efforts on measures that allow property owners and service providers to help themselves. Guideline 3. Identify specific projects to protect lives and mitigate damage where cost- effective and affordable. Guideline 4. Use available local funds, when necessary, to protect public services, critical facilities, lives, health and safety from natural hazards. Guideline 5. Develop and foster public agency and private property owner partnerships to fund and implement mitigation measures, and examine equitable approaches for the local cost of mitigation, such as user fees. Guideline 6. Strive to improve and expand business, transportation and education opportunities in Lake County in conjunction with planned mitigation efforts. Hazard Mitigation Strategies: Mitigation strategies were presented in the Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan and those flood mitigation strategies were brought into this update. The LPC then considered mitigation strategies for other hazards, such as severe summer and winter storms and tornadoes. The LPC reviewed current preventive mitigation measures being implemented by the County and municipalities. Preventive measures include activities such as building codes and the enforcement of the Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance. Lake County is very strong in preventive measures through floodplain regulations and sustainable projects. Propejt ion measures are used to modify buildings or property subject to existing damage. The LPC agreed that special attention should be given to floodplain areas and designated repetitively flooded areas. SMC should continue with their voluntary floodplain acquisition program. Many measures can be implemented by the property owners, such as dry and wet floodproofing. Appropriate government activities include public information, technical assistance and ° financial support. Emphasis has also been placed on critical facilities; understanding their vulnerability to wind and severe storm hazards. Natural resource pLotq !i�on activities are aimed at preserving (or in some cases restoring) natural areas. They include a °' preserving wetlands, control of erosion and sedimentation, stream restoration, and G urban forestry. Urban forestry programs Source. Daily HerWd Executive Summary ES-5 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP are encouraged to protect utility lines during wind and ice storms. The LPC called for a better understanding of flood and other hazards to improve eurgen m na 'e_ went—preparedness, response and recovery. Structural n-Wgatit o pro je ts, such as the regional detention basins are still important within the County's comprehensive watershed management program. Additional watershed studies are still needed. The LPC also recommended that each community establish a formal and regular program of drainage system maintenance. The LPC identified numerous subject areas that would benefit from a coordinated up blic nformation program, including safe rooms, property protection, understanding floods, and cooling and warming centers. The LPC recommended that a common set of public information materials be developed for use throughout Lake County communities. Mitigation Action Plan: The action plan outlines the recommended activities and initiatives to be implemented over the next five years. It is understood that implementation is contingent on the availability of resources (staff and funding). The action plan identifies those responsible for implementing the action items, and when they are to be completed. Mitigation actions are not limited to those listed in the action plan. Other recommendations in this ANHMP (Chapter 5) should be implemented as opportunities arise. There are 23 action items included in this ANHMP update. The first two action items are administrative. The first action item calls for the formal adoption of this ANHMP. Formal adoption is a requirement for recognition of the ANHMP by mitigation funding programs. The LPC will provide the mechanism and a vehicle for the ANHMP to be implemented, monitored, evaluated and updated, and for continued public involvement. The LPC will report to the County Board and municipal councils and boards, annually, and participate in the next five year update. The other action items are mitigation Case Study:Lake County's Flood Hazard Mitigation program items. Many are ongoing Program activities of stormwater management and The Lake County Stormwater Management Commission emergency management offices and began purchasing repetitively damaged homes and agencies. The action items were properties in 1998 utilizing funds from FEMA's Pre- prioritized by the LPC based on action Disaster Mitigation, Hazard Mitigation Grant,and Severe � repetitive Loss Grant programs. that they felt should be implemented r Grant funding received to date amounts to over$9 I countywide and which each municipality million for the purchase of 198 structures and properties should undertake. A table summarizing in the Village of Gurnee,the Village of Round Lake the action items and the responsible Heights, unincorporated Wauconda Township and other agencies is presented on page ES-8. areas throughout the county.A mix of local cost-share funding has included Lake County's Capital Improvement Plan Adoption Program, local municipalities and SMC. i i�irewuuro rvawwma�wram.. i imo�uwommm.... oim� o i This ANHMP serves to recommend mitigation measures for Lake County. Adoption is also a requirement for recognition of the ANHMP by FEMA for mitigation funding programs. Executive Summary ES-6 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP The adoption of this Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan will be done by resolution of the County Board, the city councils, and boards of trustees of each participating municipality. The municipal resolutions will adopt each action item that is pertinent to the community and a person responsible for it will be assigned. With adoption, the County and each municipality are individually eligible to apply for FEMA mitigation grant funding. Summary This 2012 update to the ANHMP was developed by the Lake County LPC as a multi- jurisdictional ANHMP to meet federal mitigation planning requirements. This ANHMP updated the examination of natural hazards facing Lake County, establishes mitigation goals, evaluates and highlights the existing mitigation activities underway in Lake County, and recommends a mitigation action plan for the County and municipalities to undertake in the next five years. The mitigation efforts included in this ANHMP are for the purpose of protecting people,property and other assets of Lake County. Some action items are ongoing efforts; others are new. Implementation of all action items is contingent on the availability of staff and funding. This ANHMP will be adopted by resolution by the County and each participating municipality. This ANHMP will be implemented and maintained through both countywide and individual initiatives, as funding and resources become available. Executive Summary ES-7 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP twruwwua� �wrw.. gum wm wwwwwwxw.ww w mo�u wwrwurmwwawmuwxwmn w.. gym. Lake County 2012 ANHMP Hazard Mitigation Action Items ..... -------- Action Item To Be Implemented By: Lake Lake Lake Lake Municipal County County County County Boards& Municipal Other Action Item: Board SMC EMA PB&D Councils Staff Stakeholders 1. Plan Adoption ✓ ✓ 2. Plan Monitoring and Maintenance ✓ ✓ ✓ 3. Improve Natural Hazards Public ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Information Efforts 4.SMC Flood Mitigation Projects ✓ ✓ 5.Development of Flood Stage Maps ✓ ✓ 6. Property Protection Checklist ✓ ✓ W� ........ 7. Improve Emergency Response and ✓ ✓ ✓ Develop Assessment Teams 8. Incorporate ANHMP into Other County ✓........ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ and Municipal Plans 9. Property Protection Projects ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 10. Continue to map natural hazard impacts and continue vulnerability ✓ ✓ assessments _ 11. Review and Mitigation of Critical . .... ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ....� Facilities 12. Seek Mitigation Grant Funding for Additional Mitigation Planning and Cost ✓ ✓ Beneficial Projects ---- ....... ............. . ......_. 13.Continued Implementation of the ✓ ✓ VI and NFIP Requirements ................� ..._. 14. Improve Capacity of Drainage ✓ ✓ Systems 15 Implement Maintenance Programs for ✓ ✓ Drainage Systems ........._ ... ...............-- ........ ............ 16. Improve Response&Recovery ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Information Sharing and Collaboration 17. Continue Work for NIMS Compliance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ............. ............... 18. Alternate Power Sources for Critical ✓ ✓ ✓ Facilities and Shelters .............. ................_........ ........ .... _ ._.� 19. Improve Building Codes and Building ✓ ✓ Code Enforcement 20. Community Rating System ✓ ✓ Participation 21. Reduce Inflow and Infiltration to Protect Against Sewer Backups 22. Urban Forestry-Participation in Tree City USA .. ......... ........... __....... 23. Participation in Storm Ready ✓ ✓ Executive Summary ES-8 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan i C . a ter 750 s Int roduction, ctio Lake County, located in northeastern Illinois, is subject to natural hazards. Flooding, severe summer and winter storms, extreme cold and heat, and tornadoes are the most significant natural hazards that affect Lake County. These are some of the natural hazards that have the potential to threaten both life and property. Significant tornadoes have struck the County in 1965, 1996, 1997. In the past, flooding is the natural hazard that has created the most damage and disruption to Lake County. Historical flooding in the Des Plaines watershed in 1986 caused over$6 million in property damage. Large flood events were also experienced in 1993, 1996, 2000 and 2004. The month of August in 2007 served as one of the wettest months on record for all of northeast Illinois with rainfall totals in excess of 12 inches for the month in places. As a result, Lake County was declared a federal disaster area in response to the severe flooding. As recent as early 2009, the Upper Des Plaines River watershed was hit with heavy rainfall resulting in both riverine and flash flooding. Lake County can also experience dangerous winds. High winds reaching 66 miles per hour were recorded as recently as 2002 and 100 miles per hours in July 2011. The County is also susceptible to severe winter storms. The latest, in early 2011, also resulted in a federal disaster declaration for all of northeastern Illinois. During this storm, winds over 60 miles per hour were recorded causing snow drifts as high as 7 feet and resulting in numerous traffic accidents and hundreds of stranded motorists. Parts of Lake County received over 20 inches of snow during this dangerous 2011 winter storm. Lake County understands the importance of addressing these natural hazards, as well as others, in order to minimize their damages and reduce chances for possible loss of life. Lake County mitigationb programs include the implementation of the countywide Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance, developed by the Stormwater Management Commission(SMC) in 1992 to regulate new N development so that flood problems do not increase and to limit building activities in the floodplain. Also, the SMC established a flood prone property buyout program to remove structures of high flood risk from flood problem areas. Since its establishment in 1997, this program had bought out over 60 high risk homes using Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) mitigation grant funds, State fiends and local funds. Lake County and Lake County municipalities enforce building codes to protect structure from wind and seismic hazards. Lake County drafted a flood mitigation plan in 2004, and adopted the County-Wide All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan in 2006. This Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan(ANHMP) is an update to the 2006 plan and serves as a multi jurisdictional plan. Introduction 1-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 1.1 Purpose of the Plan The ANHMP allows Lake County and the participating communities eligible for FEMA hazard mitigation grant funding from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), the Pre-Disaster Mitigation(PDM) Program and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Program to fund mitigation activities. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000, Public Law 106-390) and the Stafford Act require that a communities develop and adopt a FEMA- approved natural hazard mitigation plan before mitigation grant funds can be awarded. This ANHMP meets all FEMA planning requirements including those of the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP) Community Rating System (CRS). CRS allows participating communities to earn credit towards discounts in flood insurance premiums. DMA 2000 requires that mitigation plans be updated and readopted every five years. The ANHMP has also been prepared so that Lake County and participating communities can take a proactive approach to reduce the impact of natural hazards. The ANHMP identifies the hazards affecting the County, assesses vulnerability to the hazards, determines those hazards that have the greatest effect, determines the capability of local government to implement mitigation actions, and then recommends actions that will avoid or minimize the vulnerabilities to the hazards. Each year, millions of Federal, State and local dollars are spent responding to and recovering from disasters. While no one can argue with the aim of helping our neighbors to recover from catastrophes, it can be argued that the money could be utilized in a more efficient manner. Money appropriated and actions taken pre-disaster in the form of mitigation can limit the risks to individuals, families, and businesses and reduce the need for assistance in the future. Mitigation, as defined by the FEMA, is "sustained action to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to people and property from hazards and their effects." By evaluating the County's geography, geology, climatology, seismology, economics, infrastructure, engineering, land use controls, building codes and the built environment we can understand vulnerabilities. By exercising foresight in reviewing and approving proposals for new development and redevelopment and by taking actions to reduce the risk to the existing built environment, damage from natural hazards can be reduced, and the benefits of natural disaster reductions can be reaped by the communities. 1.2 Organization of the Plan This update of the ANHMP has been organized into seven chapters: • Chapter 1 —Introduction- includes the ANHMP's purpose and organization, provides an overview of County, a summary of Lake County land use,base maps, and a summary of critical facilities. • Chapter 2—Planning Process—presents the FEMA-recommended 10 step planning process followed by the Molly O'Toole and Associates Project Team for the update, and a summary of the major changes made in this update from the 2006 ANHMP. This chapter also lists the members of the Lake County Local Planning Committee (LPC) and summarizes their activities. Introduction 1-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan w • Chapter 3 —Risk Assessment- discusses the natural hazards that can impact Lake County as well as the summary of changes to these hazards found during the update process. • Chapter 4—Mitigation Goals—presents the Lake County mitigation goals and guidelines. • Chapter 5 — Mitigation Strategies and Capabilities Assessment—provides a description of six mitigation strategy categories and summarized mitigation activities already underway in Lake County and recommendations for additional activities. The Chapter also considers the current capabilities of the County and each municipality for implementing additional mitigation measures. • Chapter 6—Action Plan—discusses the consideration of countywide and community- specific mitigation action items to be implemented as staff and funding resources allow. • Chapter 7—Plan Maintenance—discussed plan adoption, outlines the ANHMP maintenance and monitoring efforts, continued public participation, and evaluating the plan. 1.3 Lake County Overview INSYllMSIN TO TKE..NOR 6H �i �ox tm�ms�ts � PaKx &�rwvu Lake County is the most northeastern County in - .... min Illinois, and is considered to be part of the Chicago metropolitan area along with Cook, 11 OMSK Will Kane and DuPage Counties. The County " Seat is Waukegan, Illinois. The total area ofMAE Lake County is approximately 1,368 square ;, � nOX � � ''"`" WNGSTON miles; with a land area of approximately 448 %)Quols �w square miles and the rest water. Elevations in the coup range from 957 feet above sea level � �_,�,� ,� �Fm MdEAA MO y u wow r�� ,2 — ha�14A�„ to 580 feet above sea level. Land in the count �A,��, , ��t,LOCAN � generally slopes to the southeast. Much of theWFAR water area in Lake County is Lake Michigan. �� 1 ry The County is composed of 53 individual dap o ktrrgriCf' b°a communities (some partially in other counties) and 18 townships. Lake County borders ��r��AMSO�r� as°`gyp a �� No McHenry County to the west, Cook County to a�oa,re�r� WA at�ia��ry cs N 11 urca� the south and Lake Michigan to the east. Lake W MAt, g 1 ..�„�� County is approximately 23.5 miles from north a p 6�G Nui�a r &V to south. At its widest point, the southernY county border, Lake County is approximately S poi, 22.6 miles from east to west. A map of Lake County and municipalities is provided in Prsu` Aso-W Exhibit 1-1 and a map of the townships is KFINIUMV provided in Exhibit 1-2. Introduction 1-3 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 77 77 77 �xw•*rrr+ '�� m n�+nw 4y b y ANrfVC1W w, � �'" �nary 4Kd�UkfWG+Jti�"eNPdua�"k9K,hVN' BEACH PAR k, wn� �s dr w<n'mw„<r' V alWy$fi 'W�K�r'rP"P,r .a R.0'vPMAr, tPMOE'Mwf/Rc7 W 1 OX LAKC as Rt2UfdD LAfS65t5lGatfS � uib n wn�vA�x n ROUND LAKE hU lAQH �, "y � w�F d"M4RY�C,4Q,... � a muw u',,J7AY�6 nuw0— zA)r E wM1 FMiq%NNL,;pVPpdRP km (�( PK an. t� y � �rm f ,� w,„•r.,�.w. ,. 4 �� N ro !u Cr�{pkMd7dddG,tt�"Cy r cea�r�aaxAff, ryyy � A ,-�K5 We t r A00 LAKEn,wx� NK nr 0 neusar�raw�� "tiw n.?wifir "� ) µM1 6N d k as 4rmne�rn w•d a ..o l o4'E`C'CNeWWA Rf R7 F?R,oP5AnT"oiv y4"FRNON I� 'ICtW.c'R LRP4B8 J � w, ry' 4 �� 1 e HAWTHORN WV.*5 m2r„vrRd�6P�wdR�ryC:Fo"i � wewr p1� , ew,rv�m. o° "� Y �kd�d'AV7"dai7wUS'� Pf,gfEvEr YiFVfA4Y%4 LONG i+FfG+G�" dtlYJd A.,A"£LFBfN��` ° y�+y,4.uG'.➢K4KLdb'Pda 1,t 3 wtA r-0�z�r iear o. N d 9rflP'k F(yt&a" n okw� � n .. A'QP)PKG"�rMo,7, aM. RNE-RNU.ry6LpS 6�"w�`1:d:YIa W.CY w Kft17 ER^ „N,i;6XP dm8 D, v; ry awro �n� � � fc M ,NANLgc,rut,hEPe3i✓il4d"A"��W"6d'nk-y.u�y�'. I 4 a �"L.Fdr'a vydBMYR,Ax1d1 Lake County Boundary Lake County, Illinois Open Water Major Transportation Rivers and Stream Lakes and Streams Munici alities � �� take t xpresswaylinterstate p US Hdghvyay Michigan zti......State Highway " Major Road Major Rail Exhibit 1-1 Lake County Municipalities Introduction 1-4 Julie 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan pd�¢ F�eat 9t t�a� d 01 � iew� tJ �OVIPDrt Benton 1 n�:<wu� ..mow mn,w a»«�d4AP � am»,.,�w,a � � y.•. ��ww.w u�xa 1Pa a 77 nun ny rw ��. �nw a „ �u �je � � a'�✓sw�u I mae �m�a��,flw�� vG H rar t y( ii, ` vtiv1, 10 u mn. ,au 4 r 1 o Nm 9 N4 ^'A Fremont Yr l trta tltYa�gGmr; U f Waue~ nd 4�a �4 a� » P '� ..rnm., �+"p' .w'.�,� a•M. N,�� °ay�tla�r �.. �tlTli 4 ,✓ rue ` !'"'.'fir IL� "'��'M�y �,rv��ry1 r4'I�:, aW `N,. to"U t j? rt"r�:drt. a Vernon r A �9 — Pig �wdmaaa �A Morasne r a, ai lRr. Lake CountyFieundnry Lake County, Illinois M Pdific_al Township Major Transportation Ertrrrresswayrmterstate Lakes and Streams —AD- UaHighwlay Townships � +ta.fawtiwu" -.. Lame —411 State Highway Michigan Major Road Major Rail Open Water „a Fivers and StrFams ma Exhibit 1-2 Lake County Townships Introduction 1-5 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Watersheds: The Lake County contains four main watersheds. These include the Fox River, the Des Plaines River, Lake Michigan and the North Branch Chicago River. The Fox River and the Des Plainer River originate in Wisconsin. Fox River flow travel south west into McHenry County. Des Plaines River and North Branch Chicago River flow south into Cook County. Climate: Lake County has a temperate climate, resulting in a landscape of prairie grasses and hardwood forests. Mean daily average temperatures during the winter in Lake County range from 20 to 32 degrees Fahrenheit. During the summer, this range is between 60 and 70 degrees Fahrenheit. July is the hottest month in Lake County with an average temperature of approximately 72.3 degrees Fahrenheit, while January is the coldest at 19.6 degrees Fahrenheit. The highest recorded temperature in the Chicago Metro area was 105 degrees Fahrenheit back in 1934. The total average annual precipitation is 36.5 inches. Of this, 23.61 inches, or about 65%, will fall between April and September in Lake County. Population: Lake County has a population of 703,462 and a population density of 1,572 people per square mile, according to the 2010 U.S. Census. Approximately 260,310 housing units exist within the County. Lake County is the third most populated county in Illinois behind Cook County and DuPage County. The Lake County population makes up approximately 5.5% of the total population in the State of Illinois. The most populated municipality is the City of Waukegan, which had 89,078 residents in 2010. Population growth continues in the County, although the rate of growth has decreased since the 2000 census. Lake County and has grown in population 9.2% from 2000 to 2010; a higher percent change in the last decade then both Cook and DuPage Counties. This rate of growth is much higher than the growth rate of the entire state of Illinois, which was 3.3%. The Chicago Metropolitan Agency has projected population growth to continue for Lake County, with a projected population of over 950,000 by the year 2040, with nearly 327,000 households. This would represent population growth rate of over 30% from 2010 figures, and a 25%housing growth rate. Population data from the 2000 and 2010 Census are presented in Table 1-1 (townships) and Table 1-2 (municipalities). Employment: The 2009 estimated a workforce in Lake County was 359,335. The County's manufacturing sector employs the most people, accounting for 19.2% of the total workforce. Other notable sectors include retail trade (13.6%), heath care and social assistance (11.3%) and finance and insurance (7.8%). Figure 1-1 demonstrates the employment break down by sector in Lake County. The top employer in Lake County is the Great Lakes Naval Base operated by the U.S. Department of Navy. Great Lakes Station employs approximately 26,200 people. Great Lakes serve as the Navy's largest training center, as is the biggest military installation of any kind in the state of Illinois. The second largest employer in Lake County is Abbott Laboratories, which employs approximately 13,000 people. Introduction 1-6 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 1-1 Lake County Township Population Data Township 2000 Popul ation 2010 Population Antioch township 21,878 27,745 Avon township 54,950 65,001 Benton township 17,229 18,951 _� ._.. ...._._____. _ ...,... a _. _. ....__� M Cuba township 15,728 16,826 Ela township 39,688 42,654 ...... .____............ _..... m .. _ .__..._..�._� . Fremont township 23,955 32,337 �� .. ..._ .._...... .. Grant township 17,277 26,523 Lake Villa township _ 33,693�� 40,2 Libertyville township 48,876 53,139 Moraine township 34,508 _ 34,129 9 Newport township 4,120 6,770 ._........ ....... m. . _ .. ._ w_ .......... hie .._ Slds township 43,484 39,062 _ ._�..... ....�... ....... ......................_. Vernon township 65,379 67,095 Warren township 59,618 64,841 Wauconda township 16,384 21,730 Waukegan ip__... ..�................ _.. _.... ......�townsh..._.. 92,693 90,893 est Deerfield township_ 31,846 31,077 Zion township. 23,050 ._.��._...._ _�...�....24,41..._._. 3 Total: ...... 644,356 703,462 Sources:20. ....._.... _�.......__�......._..�. �.._.�. ....�......_ _._._......�..�.,._.-�� ._....._..... 00 and 2010 U.S.Census Table 1-2 Lake County Municipalities Population Data .._............................................... __._ .... Community Lake County Total __ ............. .......... 2000 Population 2010 Population 2010 Population Villa ..-..� .. .... W�______....... �.__m.,.,__ ......._ ....__..__.....�_.........__ e. d ..... .... .._��_ ge of Antioch 8,788 14,430 14,430 Villa..e of Bannockburn... ....__..........._.__��. . ,,... �....429_..... �e _... 58 1,583 ......___.. 1,g 3 Village of Barrington* 4,461 4,996 10,327 Village of Barrington Hills* �........ � - � � 503 �- � 595 4,209 Village of BeachITPark Park'""-' 13,638 -..... _.- 13,638 Village of Buffalo Grove* ...._.......__._. ........ ... 28,491 ___...... 27,8... g 52 41,496 Village of eer Park* 3,093 3,183 - D ....._........ . ...... .�.-_� _ _ Village of Deerfield* _.. _ .... �.�.....__.� �.�.-. _. . � 18,053 18, 225 Village of Fox Lake* - ..... ...__ 8,969 .. M. 10,082 ' 10,579 Village of Fox River Grove* 173 487 -- Village of Grayslake �...�._._.. �.�. ... .. .._._._____.__. ..�._..�.._...��u. ____._._._.��........ 18,506 20,957 20,957 Village of Green Oaks 3,572 3,866 3,866- Village of Gurnee 28,834 31,295 31,295 Village of Hainesville - 2,- - ...__...._-------- �3,597 -� 3,597� Introduction 1-7 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan .......... __..... . ......... ............. ..... ............ ........... _ Lake County Total . _ .... ...... _.. Co. mmunity 2000 Population 2010 Population 2010 Population -village of Hawthorn . .�...... _ ...... _........ Woods 6,002 7,663 7,663 ... City of Highland Park 31,365 65 29,763 ,763 29,763 City 4__....� _ � �� _ _ 3 ..... Village of Indian Creek 194.�. ....� 405 5 462 46 k-Viiiage of Island Lake 3,131 3,319 8,080 3,460 Village of Kildeer _��_..�... 3,968 3,968 Village of Lake Barrington 4,757 4,973 4,973 -� ...._ ....,�.. .._.�� __.�_�.� .._. ....... �. ...._� .....� ..._...... Village of Lake Bluff 6,056 5,722 5,722 City of...Lake ...............� Forest 20,059 19,375 19,375 Village of Lake Villa.._ ....., ..._.�..._._..... _...w_.... ...�..........�..�..e..-.. 5,864 8,741 8,741 Village of Lake Zurich 18,1 19,631 19,631 Village of or*.. Lakemo .....�...�....��._. ...-.�a ... ...... ...�..�......m._.. 986 3,468 6,468 Village of Libertyville 20,742 _ 20,315 20,31 �_�_ Village of Lincolnshire �� _�.�....... . -,,-1 .. -�._._...... ... ....� ....7 _ ..7_ 5 6,108 7,275 7,275 ._..�. .. .. w..�„_ ................... ..,�._--�.._._ ------.� Village of Lindenhurst 12,539 14,462 14,462 Village of Long Grove 6,735 8,043 8,043 Village of Mettawa 367 547 547 age of Mundelein 30,935 31,064 31,064 Village of North Barrington � 2,918 �� 3,047 3,047 _ City 35,918 32,574 3 of North Chicago ... _. .. ._ -_. . . . �_..�..._....�� 2,574 ...� _._. _� _.._._... . � .W ..._ Village of Old Mill Creek 251 1 78� � 178 City of Park City 6,637 7,570 7,570 Village of Port Barrington'` 777 594 - Village of Riverwoods 3,843 3,660 3,660 Vi .... und Lake ..__._ ........� .. 5,842 18,289 18,289 llage of Ro .- -m--------- __�......_w�.. Village of Round Lake Beach 25,859 28,175 28,175 ..�.. Village of Round Lake'Heights 1,347 2,676 2,676 Village of -' P Round Lake . ._...e�� ark 6,038 7,505 7,505 Village of Third� _..�.�,..__.�.,�.�.....- 1_._�._.,355 ...�. ��_.�..-....�� 1,182 1,182 ..�. ........w �w.�_. . �_ Village of Tower Lakes 1,310 1,283 1,283 Village of"Vernon Hills -� 20 12d - � � �.- 25,113 25,113 Village of Volo.:.- ...��:�..:�._.�......��..,.,�. .__� ��.._.. _....��m _.... _. ...�.. .._ �. 180 2,929 2,929 Villa ge of Wadsworth . __._.....�.. . � _ ��__.._... � .._..._.. 3,083 3,815 3,815 W Village of aucond� �._..�._._., .......w_ � ..�� r._.._. �. .�___._..:....._... ��.._..,_ .e...�-._._...... _....._. .. a 9,448 13,603 13,603 y of Waukegan 87,901 89,078 89,078 Village of Winth_..._._ . ` m_�.. � _ _ ...._. ._ �. .. _ _...... � ...._. _ � _...... g Winthrop Harbor 6,670 6,742 6,742 ............ .................. ....... ...0 ... City of Zion 22,866 24,413 24,413 __........ Uninco.. da_ _.��. .._.....__... _ _ _......�... rporated Lake County 83,917 82,220 82,220 Total: 644,356 703,462 Municim'aIities,w-it h cor orate limi s in either Cook or McHenry Counties Sources:2000 and 2010 U.S. Census Introduction 1-8 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Figure 1-1 Lake County Employment V'�Vi°u46i°4 01.RHO as a i uCnm0audnijui a alOarwoActunnig a� u oValh'oVles Ma",1.u'ade G 7 C,l y m Rek iuV If a de ri rll'lla 11 we all!"W@iisullai"'IiiCmiC9 k lltl ipalll V S!J10 aiusli Rort4 aand Lori. lg fM % ::II"'Iuufesmi nad,51dr-11vfi 'ua m1!d Ne it rill„all S wmcaas, 4i i V VVVV luuuu iiii�u 111I�'h Olf fl u wll �'�� pR i"tl V�iPill" k@'^ 5 I II"�Cai9 ii i ri 91i l �LI�wiiuVUL�i�tdau �uu�ull*anu�Yalla��ull�s��"�"a�dV��rll�bup�p ��u°u:'��aui��u��Ilu�G F l.w ie lahiD6"i Sam iDes imid II Wa,11II Ila Caine and Soi ialll auusMAaw'iee IliM�a'lhro IL�a�uu,m�'�aV�u�mtl�'Via,�llua�i� ��u��a,�slYir�u�ka ® a uu II��otkVuu�.�sw��unuanu u�i�Vu��druirPo 0�,.yii'rl sllW'ill �9;hA�il sV�:11�a�ii�a Source:Workforce Strategies,Inc.,US Bureau of Labor Statistics,US Census Bureau fit,�)-/Aw'wm-]31Ceco11111yea1,to ens„et)ni/content/statistics/workforce labor it aIis,tics fi)rre )rofiIt,.its g Schools: Lake County has about 55 elementary and high school districts. They are shown in Exhibits 1-3 and 1-4. Colleges include: College of Lake County in Grayslake (also in Vernon Hills and Waukegan), Lake Forest College in Lake Forest, Trinity International University in Deerfield, and Rosalind Franklin University in North Chicago. Introduction 1-9 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 4 yy rrd errfRev aAam ry ,d .. t .A,or.arrrA , A d � ,�psLa arx f 4 y f VI n�L-rut r FF bIY✓Fri sTtl.nGY oA V r.rurrc�91 m 'real. u~fd?',� ¢ra rC$d P1lRH j mk s+u w � "'At dr rsewar,� M�.ar.r,.v Yrr..ruu-i�t riJA LwNNCa"iP89r law'; d'�Ndk�Cab, .mom f 1 f "i LAI, l FOX'WAai$ J I rit�';p1kDAYOR'khlO`@I ND q OZt4Ar Ch uwAuwnu� '➢I(y a�rvN¢Mtl,A t AiC 0119 r„I u � owaaiii r drc ' 4UrrndlC4 isa to � z [r ..tur A�w rr� to I; d u,ilA f�nB t;✓;Mr r�,Iipji wnt r... r qm r C rc �, �Wir'Fdt C9r.. r�r�rr�r LAKE ,„.r"r."""", r me r..�, rF a �r r ur w, a*"',•wra�wA v ui u,HAr . LJ uw. R A6'wwonw +� iprn"" as ws ��k h t Y Jar•it+` W fyP;+drvrr p Ra;fir f o A r { ip' ,,saatrrm fvrmn RJ ry�:. � � 0 �d'a uscwi°t�m swr " r�i our Nwntr Arwrov%nr,C...m en«w ,o ,awr,v.{ rre rA•. rr LAXE6LVA9 rraaxaai,. cF nal 0"a ra ."" one r v rd,i�rDazoa.E �,, u,tr zr A rrArur:caaarur "=r it :ai i m�,a. ni Py P'udi":4 J r �Drra D,dS�,PFWArZoY �XtiW ,Xf �k� k ENI"A�I,iA�Y v �G^C� "uWi ITZ 1 r7 IIII -Y'aNaird,r�t i�urww yqµ 9 �AWWORN��K �1 III`UIUIUI/IIIE �. y"^W4 f N.KR`Pa r5d70SetiO'YLVY rrx� na gar ir kr�� a 4lf - r -- R OPOV� ou r rsr� ��.. RhBJ'V+�9?OUPN Mi. r F#rmum�r�c r'i13Cai�,mY ;a tar t t^vr.I„zw vrtu dA „ rtr`. I�sa t+,nil;�111, a t Y ro G!J'ubYM'id1Aa r r�8�0%a,5a,. � err �A ki "w GUNi bra� r rn, ,rre ry r Vtdud"��a�Ir �'a:,7U'f cFu�a rl 7U-� 9d9Ya l��w ,'d�N"1 .Itr�d�rr ee r� ,W rA, nr„ataasriaa�zra e��..� ,, ,fl amaa.ri..r., rrearrsaaoraa.a� `" am rtcradn� 'ri tawutaPArow Lake CounkyBoundary Lake County, Illinois Mernentary School DlMricts Elementary School DlSt!lCtS Evpresswawnterstat ut US I imi Lake —'i -State Highway ,. ,.,, Michigan Major Road i —Major Raiff Open water l Rivers and Streams Exhibit 1-3 Lake County Elementary School Districts Introduction 1-10 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan ,JJj 4 f 'nrC"ti °+d^P✓mm�+r a P G4 MUIp u tl f Y f °^^'" B t^� y v„pol.Jr P I'1 bm,o-/MY,Iw.ffpl ,l u a HY„e E41 ^r n.v°i�ra,r La:a✓i war ar„�ar, �Zrvw nno ir.,irmuv say% �y a tj N �� t�rJ.Os Ik�Y,I GFw�:7! 'y �, ""1Cw dPH'rP f3�afd'LC hbd 4-w✓wrw'�'4Pa4&t: '://, 4 �wmumWwmW J a�JX LAKE 11 1 4 Y. 1 Ik 14 Nre �..� 9��, ,� p .,.. tw a✓d� Axar�srr, m� r,�� Je�., ni i µa n i q � �� "✓� R2oUWD L AJd6di6,lCA 'v""'�,"*.«.�, �w„„�;,,Porix¢Pw ,:v J•^I n �.t lita rvr�d,� iAva i rnv wrJ, 1�1}.t 1 l �rot k4b d I °AR API ,61e�.�af� kl✓.P�.'" "5� ""I��'"� way M "" 42 �47 L �mwwmmm�woq.# wwammmwvw�w��wu mwn. wl �. f� gym,„ i djJ� Cu+u v,iYu ddl rc¢.YVtl�r.l„ °2✓^-nuu 9^.e'✓ � � Jr,.�o I ..1�r✓L'^, � P� "1nfM� ,�� ri rerrza r,.uaaE 9 ""''d' „^w a Lw vp- JarnarP„aMG+rrt �rJ�wE�se„nrcE �a � afY4b4'PFP�d@A'F 4�`NC7,h"""°�� Jr�tl�abMr 1L� w J � ar ran s �.xPod9i S✓'A,FdtV00T"v& M 0�s yia p+ qrw � aaar resa HAD"r,,acr Wh Ir4dak'. IJVif Yv _.......:...•j��" wL 7.ardl.pRsR7tl, LJrca,uharrr°roue n aa� TM� ,a us �aawFaar✓rru arra�Fa dh'r�''Ia16 r'rora rats �µ;wBt�YrrYCxv�r+7.... .� I�!k wnsra n,_ d rH'.F%d';��Nr nr v e4'Gk m,^°ter 5 i� aya m W J. MI4daW.,.'!Fd'aFx i. �W 4 Aaurrru+u�a.Pou�Ja:� a�rradrragr�ara� Lake CaounVVBuindary Lake County, Illinois . ZD EleuvienWy School DisVids High School Districts — - Erprrk,w±�yllnl�¢sRate �,- UJSHighwny � �,,e:r Lake -�Dll -F01,Highway Michigan Major Roar.? Major RAH Rivers and Streams Exhibit 1-4 Lake County High School Districts Introduction 1-11 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 1.4 Lake County Land Use and Development Current Land Use: Lake County covers approximately 448 square miles of land area. Approximately 11.7 % of Lake County is in the 100 year floodplain according to 2009 FEMA estimates. The most current Lake County land use data is presented in Figure 1.2 and Table 1-3. This data comes directly from Lake County, and was last updated in 2005. Total residential land use takes up the most space in Lake County currently, accounting for over 26% of the land. Public and Private Open space is also a large land usage, accounting for over 19% of the total land area. Exhibit 1-5 is a 2005 land use map showing how the land use breaks down across the county. Future Land Use: Figure 1-3 and Table 1-4 demonstrate the estimated future lands uses within Lake County. The time table for these future estimates is approximately 2020 to 2030. Areas to be designated for public and private open space utilize the most land area in Lake County, accounting for over 20% of land. Single family residential lots from 0.25 to 1 acre account for nearly 12% of future use, while single family medium residential lots from 1 to 3 acres account for over 16%. Future land used for transportation purposes is estimated at over 10%. Exhibit 1-6 is a future land use map showing the projected use breakdown across the county. Development Trends: Development is expected to continue throughout Lake County. The current economy has slowed development, As mentioned above, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency has projected that Lake County will grow to 327,000 households by the year 2040, from the current estimate of 260,310 . This would represent over a 25%housing growth rate from 2010 figures. Lake County places high importance on protecting their environmental resources, including the lakes, rivers and open spaces. Many communities have identified green space as an important quality of life factor in Lake County. Exhibit 1-7 presents Lake County Environmental Resource Inventory Map, which shows the location of developed areas, Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Areas, Illinois Biological Survey Stream Corridors, Protected Conservation-Oriented Open Space, Other Public and Private Open Space, Surface Water including Floodplains, Floodways, Wetlands, and Stormwater Management Commission Flood Hazard Mitigation Areas, areas of Steep Slopes and areas of Hydric Soils. This data has been used by Lake County in the development of future comprehensive plans to allow for policies and actions by county agencies and the municipalities that respect environmental and cultural resources, while accommodating desirable development. Introduction 1-12 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Figure 1-2 Lake County 2005 Land Use Wetlands Water(excluding 5.43% Lake Michigan) 6.98% Disturbed Land Utility/Waste 0.90% Facilities 1.43% i Forest/Grassland 9.25 rnment Instit Retail/Commercial � utiona l 2.53% 2.46% t;i Industrial 1.85% Office/Research t 0.68% I o�w rtaw'�w�i�wawam��rc �w�or, uwwa rartwu �i �w�wrt�nwa�w �rlwuwawuw�� wwwr�w�wauu�w�www'f!arawawwowu�mww�uwwaww� Table 1-3 2005 Land Use Land Use Acres Percent gricuI A ...— .... .H��.�_........ ... . l"--,.. ., tuial al.... 36678.41 2.18% Disturbed Land ..a... 2709.71 0.90°/° Forest/Grassland 27859.14 9.25% ......... .. ........ ...... ....... Government/institutional 7411.89 2.46% .... . ...... Industrial 5579.15 1.85% Office/Research. . 2046.22 0.68% Publi....... ....... _.. . c/Private Open Space 58373.72 19.38% . ........ ....... .......� Residential 79319.02 26.33% ..... ................ Retail/Commercial 7612.53 2.53% Transportaf �. ..._._..... ion 31944.54 10.60% Utilit /Waste Facilities mmmmmmw IT� 4 y 4298.34 1.43% Water(excluding Lake Michigan) 2Il032.48 6.98% Wetlands 16368.72 5.43% Total 3'01 W233.87 100m00% Introduction 1-13 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Figure 1-3 Lake County Future Land Use Percentiles d A riculture Gateway, Government an Utility/Waste, g � i 128% 5.53% 0.26% Institutional, Transportation 3.14% Mixed Use,0.88% (Including Water, %�%� y ROW), 10.46% 6.25% Nndus, al,3.87% Office and %lj�/ i/ Research --_Parks,2.23% f� ' l Residential Single ;f �/��'��'� � �,�Proposed Public Family Small Lot < / ; �� G�< and Private Open 0.25 acres),5.57% j �� ` Space,4.87% Residential Single = Family 'tedium Lot 11.3 acres), 16.34 ResidentialIf y Multifamily, 1.43% Residential Sing le ✓ ,1 Residential Single Family Large Lot(> Retail,4.53% Family(0.25-1 ° 3 acres), 5.16/ acre), 11.60/ fi Table 1-4 Planned Future Land Uses Land Use_...._.....W _.....___�...... .. .........._...._. ..�.m,,..-. Acres........ .. .W..Percent ..�......�. Agriculture 16,648 5.53% _..._......a_......._ . .................... Gateway ...._. 798 0.26% Government and Institutional 9,458 3.14% .......... ......................... Industrial 11,651 3.87% Mixed Use 2,640 0.88% _........ . .... .... .... ... _. Office and Research Parks 6,721 2.23% Proposed Public and Private Open Space ................_.___ 14,659 4.87%° Pu _._._. ...... blic an _..._.......... d Private Open Space 49,972 16.60% ....... _.. ..................... ...... Residential Single Family(0.25- 1 acre) 34,944 11.60 0 Retail 13,636 4.53% ................ ....................... Residential Single Family Large Lot(> 3 acres) 15,536 5.16% Resid.. .............................._. ential Multifamily 4,301 1.43% Residential Single Family Medium Lot(1 -3 acres) 49,202 16 34....... Residential Single Family Small Lot(<0.25 acres) 16,775 5.57% Transportation (Including ROW) . 31,483 10.46 mmmm Utility/Waste 3,869 1.28% Water 18,830 6.25% mm_ ....... .....__ .. ..._.......... _ ....... . .0 ........... Total 301,122 100% Introduction 1-14 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan n Pv wc° frm�0 rvn pl rV i 7 r�1p s i r� i�� y �yiV Iq�ll�f wl I( �'�� r �'" ,�;�rr��r�nrr ""�-;rtt �'>� �ia �a iy� ^l�� s�al° �'��sh �,��, ,� �u✓�✓��, u. ,�.Eb � �� C � ° f �" � "��✓erJv � v� r �.,dN�R4� t� d�a;,��n�' �i i Im a � �,i I �� '� ml ll, m �!�" � a i r,e +»H � � �'" ✓� YJY,�'�e�,��' �r�✓ P'I° maV ✓ ,4 � yr"� Vire� �` ✓�� Iix�� }�� "�"m�n� m gym(` f �� "�+��✓f�jA'i Y;�,fir �� ,l dw Y Land Use G C � I'm ��✓ `ryo %1"� �� 1 ro �7Gprrf�A��d��pM � ��r�'' rv' V�4j ��'pp p y � I f ma ✓ � U ✓ r —i Agricultural f �i i r�d � ' �r�l avn��; ✓° ! � r✓'�drr r �d j0 � �� r r ,�o,. a V,a,,��„ rir �riY h V ✓ ^'�'" fir' 8mw, �`�1 f Disturbed Land � r ,✓ „� , , � ,✓�� ,, r� +�, ,�; Na z Fgg��r v r P ,��al,i ry r� � P�k mr7,✓!r�� f rn da � n ,^l 1. �✓�rl � �f� ✓ v� 1"i�%It fi h �iN'( WW"TM'�'d`'''(,VBk „�'r ✓ ✓'mJVhirwf W �O�aa:- i4� ,i'?k�1ril �, Forest/Grassland GovernmentAnstitutional i industrial l V Y J7 ��"`�.�9'� ✓ p�y� �� a a� '�ln aVP�m �Jiu��i �„`�� f �� IW I 'S,�",: Office/Research qq ✓ �'" k'w � '✓� i�� r�'��"�uu �I�° J � �, NI �f tif��a1i:�rd� I w "�� ', (d PUbliclPrivate Open Space rroi k°e��, �✓ � �„� w;r t'y�i �, o e b a � � i✓ ak ,i �.z r%� tia� Y�✓ r��` ` fit; �fy '� 'a�r , l✓ 7>r'�' v !��r �,r�>Pr��d` m � � r v^` �;� r "d "� ✓ mr or ✓ "�r k tl� "r � chid ,�� ,� nr � �" r n��Yd m r� l�/ ru ✓ i � I Residential �� I��yw��m"✓ a � �i� Y� � �� ' 'k �y�i � v"a+p�� " r ,pz r r "�� pJ i5�f l Retail/Commercial � f,✓ � �� m ��a �p� 1 w r rya� it �w t�aq �4�� ral ¢¢�� I m ��smti I Transportation � � � X�✓,d� � � '� rr� r r�' �Iw ��ir"' ��ll k �r� �"ow U o �, I. ...... ar`�� " G� v e l:r s^" � o�"r , m'i '✓�Ir�' 1y��fl �r , ,I UtllltytWaste Facilities ,>r � r� �m� � � ��>!rr �"rdi6a �'� �� 'l� l ti✓ ~��t � �" awiln� rvr ��,�f�al w,��.�le � a a�6 ,>y�l,+i�� t� �1��ro�" �'1"��GI`r°��i �� ry,�r!"� '� `�u f�l� ✓ �r`�'L' i CC Water; FPa�roy uvui ��`4 4 r u� ��+r�'� nhfL'�U r°ro i ✓e � ry f �f�F,r<M� �e Su �k"� �` d , ' �".�.fi"d 11 Wetlands '" �'� r ' �sri^^ o��✓,nc a f� lilt or4 I ;� rc ^uwS�� ei�»�'ar ��'✓, V 7 x,rJ 4v� I �� °„; � � ^'r� a�,wri `r,(N ">A .�tt+n �61 �� ,'� u� m✓�✓ �"�m"f� "�fl�r��V �, �"'" i ,��I�i V ,�;lr'•a �'q 7W� .✓l'�v�r��ty"�v'd"'�i��,»�rPIW�` �7�"1 M1'y i m >� 4� �f l"'r��%. �Pw ��trv'�'�hk�'k��tl ,li" .""M.y �"(„ya v w�Wza G", r,� >NdVif',�'�,"U"`�i r xf m s�"'t ✓ rl/V ;', 6��f�(� ✓m �+jn rV 1-�i e. ,i �a y"�ro�,»r:; ✓� '% „l��d$1)ut� rm�i0��;��✓�'��✓�x�I � ✓7 y,„�frsr,Cf Yai 7i 1j��:,�mY Pi lu ��` "'r rr, �'' '1 ,;G rv�fM r di �mo ✓ 1 �.�✓'�.,� J��awar�n�r �dY�l�� ;,y�r�w��m�`"l�✓�lr��J)�r rr��p�� 'ar��alr »�� iiJ� ekyi�!mt, mr,`%�"�+re u�r��'" �V" ;,% a Vv' E ,� p'm( ef.�) N�m rro� T� dr�mt ail s,„ n 1 l�,�a'�?, � j„ ,,,r,�l'� f!N �dP�J�{i�i Yh�"am �w � ',;✓�N � rV' ✓«pw��r��r, ✓�,�r ?l6 � �' �P ��d��i �,,dd�r ��`�i,,l`�if� �,tfi�'r `�¢��'o�yv✓ r>te ,��,�r�'��,rry��', W,u N�9 A r� J V" G'� r� �� '''�'��1 irvli �� "1�� S f r 1 �'� � ✓ �u✓�'u�s�k�r r ,�� hI'n�f��,�aU� "9^p y�"AY'�rlr��r�l�;�l . 11J�'mti4i T!�/aH,fVf��^ rval�i�l'ije�'e9rLe'TMII 'Jr�.,,,,e ,„fl�rP,ti� fn �" d✓ ry le or�' `t u,�'L real°§d✓wleb f� Jlr 'V ✓ �, g..... i ✓Y r ,�wa� d amp ., vVh,r�d�om. !tl✓ , mm '�-;uu�'rva�m ✓r �r� "✓rvr �r r`i, rr ! �f, r uar dd ! �, � r �'Fy,�I>d..�s a �� 7la��1�>�"��r�' V r5a z`,1 as��✓d rl�� il�e j�� ✓ P 6 �V tiry��y;�✓✓A r r a F � a al I M ��.:✓* �r� �I,��Hii.,,) {V'�°��y i �+�,d✓Rof4�'iro'�a'�k,"i ""�$m�tr �7�A1,)�9 i��^r j�✓�d�� 1��141m��,�,�✓rm I ar�1�"»�l ilk �lxh� �` �rva��lv�d��'7�� i'li,�s�'�,�°Jaf,7r I E� 1 2 7� �ma llr IhD ll� e � a � iif Ply' ,y" I,Iw 1 i{w✓ ! mrvGi f 'Vfl rW �� ea..„�,N,� � ��y"�� ✓��✓�r�'��„',Oak��rv�y�G �Y'�✓'�� '1� '��wf��u r>y P'�� 'd !°U� �,'�� Id°� rviyro� .;`r;�V"*rv+,,. { �1 81,�➢ t alT � rt � P a aW � �i � 1 ��wa �N ( r✓w'h IrY �, V, ,a.mFjWr � ' Ysa ,��.:✓��„L,. 7iPl.,��vg0i�ri l��ru"arrv'�'. a,kwwu xrry(rr'11�(`a �ioi ' 4"� 17fory .._.. ............. Miles I✓, _..., w ...mra� r, ��rrwM�.� m., a.n? �,.0 am,�'„�..H�MwmrPr.�a.�.vak✓✓ rux�,mm w i m�ran.�. mo�mamvluareim .w.wummawam rm��irrmommmmuwmxrww.mwa �arvn"mnw �n mmxvmmmoum �rmmnfrmirc�i�im>'m�uwmrww� Exhibit 1-5 2005 Lake County Current Land Use ewm -.. uu¢v� �nniwm iu�� wmammwuxwn.�om ia� naamammmawwmi� i memmuoi�m�w Introduction 1-15 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan i w Ism,u Ll U r e k e C o u n L a r-i LJ s „ ,'� < � .%� � -,a^ .„ t I✓° f✓ l 9 (��/�l�n�' ��`��''"1 rail: ,� --- �—. T ✓ r 4 � J✓ � v�µ di�l�dr._"`�,��po �"�✓r� Yr I ti � f �{ i� tm!'� lk , Land Use Agricultural �� ' �� r� ��✓i e �,�wr �W �'urn ,+��AN1 1✓ 9i ✓ r r a r r 9rXrr '` er✓y�u � il% I Gateway j�r�l��r ' �, i �( a� Gs�,�9✓erg x✓ t p��x � �� ys✓ �5 rcu✓fir its gar✓✓ Pry ib � l . nut r dt o�w I✓ ,il� H��pfl l ;, r" ,"^ A�T� "1J�rr✓ GOVernt7lentandlnStltUtlClna + i✓ /,��I �t�w 'ru i H �! x r�r Ul � ki ,rr�G^fi ..., ��yr�� /��iG+ "7 �(U �� 1 w✓�"��' a tiv! ✓,w�✓ �� rv,<��r�r �° 1 ,.Industrial Mixed Use 9 ✓rr ��+�r�na��ryr r a.� ✓ �G✓e�+✓ri r��0�V"`,r r �u -,F��n✓� ✓ r�a � m �r �r��; ri��' Iii✓N RiP "zzN t ✓ iG� ✓"^r�'✓�� ✓'1✓'„ i,v adb�tla .l b i �� o fl�hVfti�'�'�rl� 11 E d~ jWlN +f��x/� a �!�Y ✓ 1 v;i� l lI? fyib ✓ /I ✓1 dA✓�� a�k� r' s Y1�F ? .r✓rJ NFL ° /� � ;WN " office and Research Parks � ✓ !w��' �J i� 1 x ear t 1� �/�ty�i�� a �"l�� a¢¢ I f��µpP qu� AV/1 woo;�/�� '� � �" "4�°}� �w"k'�✓%C :,�; ��%!lf�u',�,�"i 7i�1��.+� �t I,rI��PU �r;': "" i N kh'i ✓c I d�rr r �IIE. s ✓/�);'i J � i 'r dN!Pi ✓N Ti Proposed Public and Private Open SpaceP� �i«7 7�i ✓la �t �'ld�'r 1,��,�..: "i (N m�� ✓'�r�. ,fir.✓�'' �ll�+�°V i`��.w��"i/fG G'�r r i Public and Pnvate Open Space i' Iy � �✓�`a �� ?�Ir,r,x�QI a ��y��f � r� ✓ ,:� �!i ra r� Fn 1 "�rtel iP14�'�r(a V (,� i I Residential Single Family(0.25-1 acre) � i d��ra��, �1' � ti r '191 rY Residential Single Family Large Lot(>3 acres) �`��i , �aw ��1 eta ,au �✓ � ,�w` Residential Multifamily s �" x i��a hz�y � Y°," � a ✓ l 7 m Py✓ ✓ J� U Residential Single Family Medium Lot(1-3 acres) � �✓� i a � tr �� °i � �., �;ca4� ✓iy� ( " �� i � r ,,; �Residential Single Family Small Lot(<0.25acre) � � �� °� 01 � , ��aPa � �✓ Retail/Commercial � ° fr ��' �,�„q .. r a�q � ✓ TM �v k7 7�v ur �� pti4�P/�lri �-� —'i Transportation is pi r 6 '�,��1 iiPy1 +z' ✓� �� ;��' arm. `y �t a� r 1� n�l" (�� "� +V l "�w. � �o;��l��Y�r' ✓, ��`��'a ��°�"�,,I� � �iun!�:��r�w�� ; UtilityMaste Facilities „� r1r �m I rr ,�r�^, (�' ✓k � ° 1� r ,' a �y va llt�a� r �iir r e , r� V �� ! r Water a!�au1�✓uu �% 4� �✓ r ✓Ai ��r P°'V ✓„'l a�@41r�7� � rriw� � ^° �✓ N �a✓ar✓JV° ✓r��j� "ry'J'�i aY10 ,m✓ ' ` � 8 ��a� u �,�„4 � i a� �u �� n �� pia t✓ �,+ �' �✓ *u,✓,�� i� � ^n✓ aa"'".°'`w�'��k j'�!�JfF�( 1��V � r�r � �z�d ✓ � � �w � "a�✓✓'�` .w n�,r� F i�^��t fir 2p a��u,�q � �l i "+l'� '"� I r � Ip r� �+� I. 4'b of „t i✓ ✓ !g' r x � i rra � I"�w rr b�%"�� s e fir'""6`' f ' ✓��"��1"'��ii� � �r� ap r i'��rr"j�� r 23�' +�� yr1rH �� rPy pp d� � ro ✓� �r 4, � r ✓ �y� � � '"Mr,,, ' � � ��lW✓�kj r y �' �'. ; y ry i �jj�' �� { a d� p "��f, � y 9 a � Flea mt I✓w� Y �w ✓r r d h 1 r � h^ i � r� si la's" a�A''�a � j +�' `'�✓ VI; ti�w"a'ry*9 sir N'r,!rf r'iid .t �'�I, r� � Y r �'r,� ✓ �,a.�liVd I yP Awewr-n,,. y� yYvb� �Yr`q { 4"Y s� �+�1;. DfVYu ��yd � plti mr,r i a �i ✓„ w aka f „� �, ,� ✓y'*n. Ord��✓ ti�s e i � �� i�� evt ialM ,l�r w A��F"1d�,� r a i ✓�y w�� «"�"� �rmrr � r i $w,�5 ✓ � ��r i �'� � 4 � '��/l��iy�� j�Sri r"fl�"t�Y ��✓rr r � w ^n�'��„„�rµ�rY� ✓'�i i �t �//d✓tl p e a � iia � t4� Fryry�� p✓ ,�' ir�� c. P'l� "'I i ,P'l�'�,r�'�1'�rr v ��J �pmu" I e i��a.5^y; ✓ lv p � �� y, iYl�fmk,� ',7 "^fib Alit i r i P A F'r ilrr / yP✓�>�` r�r� .4i1✓ 1 � b i�t��;�rr�� plrw�✓r� �b rj , yawn✓ �� i� � r �" ✓ P �✓�� m �� "��'�" II�A v� �` ��y��,��h P ( �� ' � �i��r� ��U�;rr,« � 9�1�r��,r f . ., rr� ✓�✓!+r �r✓lyJ,"�i3�� H� � � l�ou�� r✓G„'Y"09 F � �i„�' ,�✓r9 ��!��Y w'��N'�� y� w �� ,✓ .,r (ail' "�i'""cr ��Bwh'u�1�4°I�a�� li', �u� nif��rr�r'!�>>''"' �%� �:ir�' Yr�✓ail(ill✓k,tll �iU.��'",��r��uwr 'zl.„° is 0 1 2 4 6 8 Na es - y � mmmmmrwireuwmmm�m�rimmaarvmm�ww,�wm�m ��w w��uo�wwrom�.�mmwmmm�wae,rammmm uwmuwwmure�uvuaan� wmmmrmi... arvmwn% .m,�wor. umumumurvwmu�u�re�,marwn i wmuuuiro�.roemwwwn mm�o Exhibit 1-6 Future Lake County Land Use Introduction 1-16 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 1.5 Lake County Critical Facilities Critical facilities are buildings and infrastructure whose exposure or damage can affect the well being of a large group. The continued operation of critical facilities is vital to preparedness, response and recovery from any sort of event. Critical facilities are generally placed into two categories: Buildings or locations vital to public safety and the disaster response and recovery effort, such as police and fire stations and communication systems, and --- Buildings or locations that, if damaged, would create secondary disasters. Examples of such buildings or locations are hazardous materials facilities and nursing homes. Critical facilities are not strictly defined by any agency. For this mitigation planning effort, a number of categories of critical facilities were used, including County, municipal and township facilities, police and fire stations, public, educational/school facilities, places of assembly, medical and health care, facilities for special needs populations, transportation, and infrastructure. Critical facilities were identified by the County and each municipality for the ANHMP update. Lake County GIS Department maintained a database and GIS layers for critical facilities, however the County made use of this planning opportunity to update the critical � facilities list. Critical Facilities (FEMA definition) Table 1-5 and Exhibit 1-7 present the • Hospitals, nursing homes, and housing likely to critical facility data for Lake County. contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood. Table 1-6 summarizes critical facilities • Police stations,fire stations, vehicle and located in the 100-year floodplain. [Table equipment storage facilities, and emergency operations centers that are needed for flood and map to be updated.] response activities before during and after a flood. Further investigation into critical facility q Public and private utilities that are vital to maintaining or restoring normal services to locations, use of critical facility mapping, impacted areas before during and after an and protection of critical facilities is event. • Structures or facilities that produce, use or store discussed in Chapters 3 and 5 of this highly volatile,flammable,explosive,toxic ANHMP. and/or water reactive materials. Other Critical Facilities (Lake County additions) • Schools, institutions, [other]. Introduction 1-17 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 1-5 All Lake County Critical Facilities al Facility g Cate ........� ... ......... �....., Number Critical Airports 7 _... ................� City Halls 44 CollegesmmmmmITITITIT 25 Fire DepartmentsmmITITIT 66 Government Buildings ....... 14 Health Department Offices 20 Helipads 11 Hospitals 7 Libraries 31 Metra Stations .........._�� ..........�....... 31 Museums 43 .............. ............_ _......... Police Stations 44 .......... Schools 495 Offices Township Offi _ _._.._. 25 Total: 863 Table 1-6 Lake County Critical Facilities Located in the 100-year Floodplain ............. Critical Facility CategoryNumber �_�� .....�...._ ._... _ ... .. ....... Airports 3 City Halls 2 Fire Departments 2 Government Buildings 1 Heli ads 1 ........... Museums 1 _....... ................................._. Police Stations 2 ........ ..... ... ......._- Schools 9 Total: 21 Introduction 1-18 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan r w5r ,.t y w� , -s Is ... t " �� as " ,4 71 �. a: ^mm , IT"p " 01- t x" 104 A" r p Lake County Critical Facilities Lake County Boundary Airport Health Dept Office Museum Interstate/Expressway R City Hall 129 Helipad Police — U.S-Highway college Hospital � SoYweeal .........•.... State Highway w Fire Department Library "rowrrship Office Ma,por Road !' Government Building Metra Station Open Water FEMA,Floodplain Exhibit 1-7 Lake County Critical Facilities Introduction 1-19 Julie 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Chapter 2 Planning Process 2.1 Planning Approach The Lake County ANHMP was first developed in 2006 utilized the four phases or steps of hazard mitigation planning as recommended by FEMA in the "State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To Guides" (FEMA 386-1 to 4). The 2012 update of the ANHMP expanded the planning phases to the 10 step approach recommended by FEMA through the Community Rating System (CRS)program, shown in Figure 2-1. i FEMA"How-To Process (2006) FEMA 10-Step Process (current) I s,ep, organize ire souireslpoa Organize U vM vie sm"T,r„aAeercemauvu M sdrm k d k=s - cols Y9rm uxvrexrnpr�s:a r�aaPAriC18o w zuw,"mpam9ae4 �� '�,:. aHm ,µuYlsroVvs yvHayer!n arwvgrmmwrwru naanroKF9pk H " ufl� s knr.„doh rsarnml tlrr�romlwp urn°ur.Havgy. �I Step 2 0 .0 M u�mI:H .d rflYan;anMwm eCNOg`mR, dl bn�bvv a- n.a .....--t6. Involve the Public au�•,u b,ro pal nrno g r r�•. w- (this step continues throughout the entireprocess) Step 3 assess risks ,r Coordinate with Agencies&Organizations NW,u�eernmav n r oma+artw lt,ro r, (this step continues throughout the entire process) f"NpryMwWJtiNtltraJr'k+A"AW IW'YMP W., 1� CwIDtlt9Y#9fAd4Y 8 rN@$Uw�Cm nft Ifl lro d N�`8tbµ OM w a emvarsmtsann9 lwivxr mmc,o?U. rxamt y My mn I a r."Baad dvy m@vem 17oc 1P IY v Step 4 wza,mn Irevr,aery unwvunuroiflq m�.+nenvw. /N"a; Assess the Hazard STD'iy»%°Jl�Jt�l/rlvl//OF/rr„ j Step 5 u develop a m•r•ultug `on plan Evaluate the Problem A mal WN h ILn d0Y✓dH+MiWNd'rNM"7M PYP rbro rYY1sY. p,m. d by aY.MBWWCd.QYMIm Mkf dV 'e ed W �i, r9rnCroelrrdn,vs aa6iwt NYIRM1tr gaeruutlflVroa m6'xsxulr9 G.va &• ', +^h Step G mv1varram'uvu tnar undmawr eftli 7hrvmhIs of Set Goals . Oq Ina.Id mf16CEgA Wt GAwl w1a aatanwov Mw b am6'�uuin�ruoamir..xr I V I Step 7 Review Mitigation Strategies implement a plan an monitor progress stems cam, can bring me pWn to No m a Draft Action Plan MYAaP,dkar dN1 wrap e umdcMnvsvlkt,r tilp dtr rtk rm,lugt9 a fl cN rr,C0 I am M �'�ry�� y t7wErzmr7 wd yuwrl ward!�fd m4 s � tru mrvrwurwa dN+ra r,rw ,�rtxw w'nr near ram pmvr�;pv,K�lrgaum. , I flu'u*NRrukO YAxuuG,I,NJaw ga9uwrF umrrrvfpWnA IddK'wwmvt 'WCmruu. ,✓•d 1 vA M(Ntlnd" PA,W rlm t :4,"la MwMwfi�U mue 1, step 9 �f ""0mrvw 'nmmr"r+awtawaAZ�'.drt11 Adopt the Plan Step]0 d _ implement,Evaluate,Revise m Figure 2-1 Planning Steps Planning Process 2-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The FEMA 10-step process allows provides Lake County with a more tailored approach to the ANHMP update and allows the ANHMP to qualify for credit under the CRS program. The update to the ANHMP was conducted with the input of the Lake County Local Planning Committee (LPC), which includes various Lake County departments and agencies and Lake County municipalities. The LPC has been in place since the development of the 2006 ANHMP and has been meeting annually. Regional, state and federal agencies were invited to join the LPC for the update of the ANHMP, and all meetings were open to the public. Participating members of the LPC are shown in Table 2-1. About one-third of the LPC members were involved with the development of the 2005 plan. A list of all participants who attended one or more meetings is presented in Appendix A. Some small municipalities were represented by the Lake County staff at meetings. The LPC met four times from May to September 2011 for the update of the plan. The efforts of the LPC were coordinated by the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC) and Lake County Emergency Management Agency(LCEMA). Other County departments, such as the Department of Planning, Building and Development, participated and provided support for the plan update. A meeting was also held in 2012 to develop an annex to the ANHMP with added Lake County communities. Technical support for the LPC and the ANHMP update was provided by Molly O'Toole &Associates, Ltd. (MO&A). MO&A is an engineering consulting firm that specializes in hazard mitigation. The update of the risk assessment was provided by Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. (Baker). Baker staff also assisted at the LPC meeting and with other update efforts. - - 2.2 Update Process f Organization and 1'0 Coordination: Organization (Step 1) began with the County �� r and the MO&A in May 2011. " r i The LPC brought together for the first meeting in ANHMPm� update process in May 2011. Lake County village boards and city councils provided SMC with"letters of intent" for participation in the ANHMP update at the time of the SMC grant application to the Illinois Emergency Management Agency, and they were asked to pass a resolution of participation in May 2011 that stated their interest and commitment to the planning effort. This was to foster the understanding of the ANHMP and for possible credit under the CRS program. Planning Process 2-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 2-1 Local Planning Committee (LPC) Communities and Representatives .. �_.. .... _........ _ ._ ........... _._.. ....................... _.. Community Name Title ............. Village of Antioch ...�� Lee Shannon _... EMA Coordinator .Village of Bannockburn Maria Lasday Administrator aBeach .... ................ ._.......... ........ Villa of g Park Chet Splitt EMA Coordinator . Village of Beach Park.......... ... �Tracy--Miracle.. ......._ _. . .... Administrative Coordinator _.... .... _ ....... ........ Village of Buffalo Grove Greg Boysen Dir.,Public Works Villa a of Deer M1M1 WWWWWWWWWmmmIT g Park Todd Gordon GHA/Village Engineer ........_---- ....... _.........._ Village of Deerfield Barbara Little Dir.,Public Works Village of Fox Lake Wm.._ ITmFrank Urbine _ m EO _.. _..... ........... Village of Fox Lake Annette Wolf EMA Coordinator ......... ... .. _......_ _.. ...............� Village of Fox River Grove Tim Zintl Asst.Public Works Supt. Village of Grayslake Kurt Baumann EO Village of Green Oaks Elaine Palmer .... . g almer Administrator ................ Village of Gurnee Dave Ziegler EO m........... .............. Village of Hainesville Al Maiden RCCA/Planner ITITITITITIT _Village of Hawthorn Woods Pam Newton Chief 0.........Aer WWXmm�mmmITITIT� rating Officer City of Highland Park Mary Anderson Dir., Public Works ............... ................ Village of Indian Creek Represented by County ...... ........ ... _.... Village of Island Lake Connie Mascillino EMA Coordinator .. ..... ..... ...... Village of Kildeer Mike Talbett Administrator ..... . ........ ..... ............ Village of Lakemoor` David Alarcon Administrator _................. ....... ..... ... Village of Lake Barrington Chris Martin Administrator Village of Lake Bluff Brandon Stanick _ Asst.Administrator ............. .... City of Lake Forest Kevin Issel Deputy Fire Chief ..................... .......... Village of Lake Villa Bud Osmond EMA Coordinator .................. Village..of... _ ..... . Lake Zurich Kurt Kaszuba EO ......... .._................... ........ __ ..... Village of Libertyville Rich Carani Fire Chief _.... _ ...._ .............. _..._ Village of Lincolnshire Jennifer Hughes Dir., Public Works VillageITof Lindenhurst Wes Welch Dir., Public Works Village of Long Grove David Lothspeich Village Manager Village of Mettawa Represented g uuuuWmmmmmmmmmITITIT p ted by County Villagef Mundelein Bill Emmerich Dir.,Public Works Village of North Barrington Ku Baumann E _._......� Kurt o City of North Chicago Josh Wheeler EO Village of Old Mill Creek Represented by County City of Park City* Ken Magnus Bleck Engineering/Village Engineer Village of PortmBarrin ton u _... IT g g Mark Rooney EO . ......... .... Village of Riverwoods Rob Durning Dir.,Community Services Planning Process 2-3 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Community Name Title _.. ....... .......... Village of Round Lake Marc Huber Administrator Village of Round Lake Beach Keith Neitzk � XmmmmmITITIT � - � WWITIT e Dir.,Public Works _...... _..... ........, Village of Round Lake Heights Pat Bieck EO Village of Round Lake Park* Johnson George n Dir.,Public Works L ........ Village of Third Lake .._. Gary ryBeggan -...... President Village of Tower LakesXmmmmmmmmIT-�V Represented WuuWmmmITIT g epresented by County Village of Vernon Hills John Kalmar Dir.,Community Devel .... opment Village of Volo Eric Tison Asst.Administrator ._._. a ...........__ . ...�.�..... ......� .......... Villa o g f Wadsworth Moses Amidei Administrator Village of Wauco ......nda_._ . _ �� ...... ...... nda Bob Devery EO CityWaukegan R...... of g on Laubach EO Village Wof Winthrop Harbor _-� Jana Lee ._....�....MITClerk/Director of Admin istration istration ....... .. ... __ _.. City of Zion John Lewis Fire chief ._...._ ... ...... _ .....--........ Lake County Kevin Kerrigan LCDOT Lake County Brittany Sloan PB_.. &D ....... .....__ ......... Lake County Kent McKenzie LCEMA _.......... Lake County Evan Moya LCEMA Lake County � Mike Warner SMC ..................... Lake County Christine Gaynes SMC Lake County Patty Werner SMC _.. _ ..._... .......... ......._... Lake County Susan Vancil SMC Lake County Jeff Laramy SMC _........... .......................... Countryside Fire Kris Kazian Deputy Fire Chief/Countryside * See annex of the ANHMP for participating documentation. Opportunities for neighboring counties in both Illinois and Wisconsin, agencies, nonprofits, and other interested parties to be involved in the planning process were made available, including: U.S. State Geological Survey 0 National Weather Service 0 Federal Emergency Management Agency 0 Illinois Emergency Management Agency Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Office of Water Resources Illinois Department of Natural Resources, State Water Survey American Red Cross Fox Waterway Agency Planning Process 2-4 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Coordination(Step 3) with these organizations was accomplished through meetings, phone conversations and/or e-mail exchanges. During the planning process, the interested agencies were provided with meeting agendas and the previous meeting's notes. At the end of the planning process, these agencies were also sent a notice requesting their review of the draft Plan. They were asked to provide any comments in time for the public meeting. Existing plans and programs were reviewed throughout the planning process. Plans reviewed and incorporated are discussed further in Chapters 3 -5. Public Involvement: Step 2 of the planning process was to obtain input from the public, particularly property owners that have been affected by natural hazards. The public was invited to participate through several concurrent means, including: • Contact with LPC members and their organizations • A standing invitation to attend LPC meetings • Property owner survey r Press releases provided to local newspapers and included in the Lake County"B- Newsletter" and newspaper coverage June 2011 ��fi i ti LPC meetings and the ANHMP update process were publicized through media and the Lake County SMC website, community newsletters, and local newspapers. Examples of public involvement efforts are provided in Appendix B. Lake County residents were invited to provide public input to the planning process through"Survey Monkey," an online survey tool. The web link was included in news releases and promoted by LPC members. Printed copies of the survey were also made available at village/city halls. The survey was open from last May to mid-July 2011. Ten questions were presented and results were used to evaluate the prioritization of natural hazards and to develop a sense of citizens' understanding of their mitigation needs. Residents from 14 communities participated in the survey. Respondents ranked tornadoes, high wind/microbursts, snow storms, floods and severe summer storms as hazard events of the greatest concern. Over 40% of respondents felt"somewhat prepared" for hazard events and 25% felt"adequately prepared." Respondents rely on television, websites and radio for hazard information, and information from community Planning Process 2-5 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan communications, including fact sheets are relied upon for information on how to protect themselves. w r Yo?Y �'tl 1rd4 lf..r1ti"aJMVd'p I'. f iTI pV"d'"ffi`III P1117 CYI gG:+il llY IIY l'�9d IIIYII`IIIII"1M Gb."`r S Lake County Hazard Mitigation Plan ni %mve ' ° Im ri' i Vi f „91 II—tu'P ui uw iu,u vu�V i,I rU rr� ( ^ iiPi r iil �i uil7� uml;loill r dNI lu,o I II i a�.�� di la 1'1 ir.i� I tlb riuua i'.u.�i.in,+�,� ti:�illlu u.i ciu ll��u�r, V�lViluuncpl 4fn'�Nu'T Ilrk,°Irrour.aw^', l r uuijii Inns in n(r.iml liruut"lu srr} tl 72 ��mmmmmwmwmm��wuww,mu� wam�umummi i uuuuwu% uimm� mi rwu�a�i a m��wwmw. Public meeting: The draft Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan was made available to be viewed. Per SMC's own policies, adjacent jurisdictions and state and regional agencies were invited to be involved in the planning process and received a copy of the plan for review and comment. In addition, the draft plan was made available on the County of Lake and SMC websites. Press releases included where the public could view the plan and forward comments. The public comment period extended from August 4 to October 4, 2011. A public meeting was held on September 22, 2011 at the Lake County Administration Building in Waukegan, Illinois, for review and comments on the ANHMP update. Hazard Assessment and Problem Evaluation: Steps 4 and 5 make up the updated ANHMP risk assessment (Chapter 3). The potential hazards reviewed were based on the natural hazard identified in the 2006 plan, hazard events that occurred in Lake County between 2005 and 2011, and based on the LPL's consideration of natural hazards in their community. During a LPC exercise at the May 2011 meeting, hazards were scored for their likelihood of occurrence or frequency, for potential impact or consequences, and for the vulnerability of the County to them. Chapter 3 examines the hazards, including a hazard assessment (what causes the hazard and the likelihood of occurrence) and provides a vulnerability assessment (which estimates the impact of the hazard on life, health, and property). The tasks involved with conducting the risk assessment for this plan included; hazard identification, inventory of community assets vulnerable to the hazards, hazard events profile, magnitude, history, probability, impacts, flood insurance claims, repetitive losses, flood audits, future development trends, and mapping these components. Planning Process 2-6 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan For this update and for the purpose of the Lake County Emergency Management Agency, communities submitted current lists of critical facilities for the purpose of updating the County's database. Developing Goals: Mitigation planning goals were developed by the LPC for the update of the ANHMP. A goal setting exercise was conducted at the June 2011 meeting, and then the goals were reviewed and revised at the July 2011 meeting. Guidelines, or objectives, were also developed by the LPC during the goal setting exercise, and are presented with the mitigation goals in Chapter 3. Mitigation Strategy: For the update of the ANHMP, the mitigation strategies included in the Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan were considered for all priority natural hazards discussed in the risk assessment. The mitigation strategies are organized into six general categories and all measures were reviewed in relationship to the updated mitigation goals and developed guidelines. The six mitigation categories include: preventive measures, property protection, resource protection, emergency services, structural measures, and public information activities. The mitigation strategies and the capabilities of Lake County and the municipalities are presented in Chapter 5. Action Plan: At the July 2011 LPC meeting, an updated action plan was formulated. Both countywide and community-specific action items were considered. The 2006 ANHMP action items were evaluated along with new action items formulated from the Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan, as a result of recent hazard events, and based on new opportunities. The action plan in presented in Chapter 6 provides a summary of changes made from the 2006 action plan to the current action plan. 2.3 Plan Adoption and Implementation The County Board will adopt the plan for the unincorporated areas of Lake County and the individual municipalities will adopt the plan for the incorporated areas. Implementation of the updated ANHMP and the implementation steps were discussed at the September 2011 meeting of the LPC. Plan maintenance approach is discussed in Chapter 7 2.4 Summary of Major Changes to the ANHMP The 2006 ANHMP included seven sections and 18 appendices. The updated ANHMP is made up of seven sections (renamed to chapters) and seven appendices. The majority of information included in the removed appendices was incorporated into the body of the ANHMP. Of note, updated maps that were included in the old Appendix B were brought into the updated risk assessment in Chapter 3. Also, the Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan included in the 2005 Appendix K was incorporated into similar chapters in the ANHMP. A summary of major changes is included in Table 2-2. Planning Process 2-7 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 2-2 Summary of Major Changes in ANHMP _.��.._.._..2005 ANHM.P..:�....... .� Updated ANHM_.:� a..m.m,.., p P Summary of Changes Section 1. Introduction Chapter 1. Introduction Description of Lake County added, along with section on current and future land use (development trends)and Lake County critical facilities. Section 2. ITPlanning Process Chapter 2. Planning Process Updated. ...... Section 3. Hazard Chapter 3. Risk Assessment Updated and based on County and SMC Identification, Profile and data and GIS mapping layers. Vulnerability Assessment -Section 4. Capability Chapter4. Mitigation Goals (Chapters switched) Updated goals and Assessment i created guidelines. Alternatives moved to Chapter 5. Section 5. Goals and Chapter apter 5. Mitigation Strategies Six mitigation strategies for all priority Alternative Actions and Capabilities hazards considered. Discussion of current Lake County mitigation activities added. Updated capabilities. Section 6. Priority Mitigation Chapter 6. Action Plan Updated and reformatted. Action and Implementation ................ Section 7. Plan Maintenance Chapter 7. Plan Implementation Updated, and Maintenance ..................... Appendices A through R Appendices A through F 2006 exhibits of other pertinent information brought into Chapters 1 through 6. Planning Process 2-8 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Chapter 3 Risk Assessment This chapter provides an updated risk assessment of natural hazards that could impact Lake County. Hazards described in the 2006 ANHMP evaluated based on LPC input,hazard events over the past five years, and based on data and mapping that has become available. The risk assessment for priority hazards such as severe storms and floods, include a hazard analysis and a vulnerability assessment. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and dam failure, include only a hazard profile in this ANHMP update. The hazard profile includes a description of the nature of the hazard, past occurrences and damages, and the likelihood or probability of the hazard occurring in the future. Lake County assets when applicable have been examined to estimate potential exposure and potential losses attributable to these natural hazards for use in the vulnerability assessment. A summary of the risk assessment for Lake County is provided at the end of this Chapter. 3.1 Natural Hazards in Lake County A key step in preventing disaster losses in Lake County is developing a comprehensive understanding of the hazards that pose risks to its communities. The risk assessment terms in Table 3-1 can be found throughout this ANHMP. The hazard profile includes a description of the nature of the hazard, past occurrences and damages, and the likelihood or probability of the hazard occurring in the fixture. Lake County assets when applicable have been examined to estimate potential exposure and potential losses attributable to these natural hazards for use in the vulnerability assessment. Table 3-1 Defined Risk Assessment Terms HAZARD Event or physical conditions that have the potential to cause fatalities, injuries, property damage, infrastructure damage, agricultural loss, damage to the environment, interruption of business, other types of harm or loss RISK Product of a hazard's likelihood of occurrence and its consequence to e t y socit VULNERABILITY Degree of susceptibility and resilience of the ......�.......environment ............. ... ..... .... g p y community and environment to hazards p�Tje, 7'e eral,Emergerwvy Management Agency, g i The local risk assessment summary is a process or application of a methodology for evaluating risk as defined by probability and frequency of occurrence of a hazard event, exposure to people and property to the hazard, and consequences of that exposure. Different methodologies exist for assessing the risk of hazard events, ranging from qualitative to quantitative. A list of potential hazards was reviewed by the LPC at the May 2011 meeting to determine if the classification of high, moderate and low risk hazards described in the 2006 ANHMP were still applicable. The LPC completes a natural hazard screening worksheet. This worksheet allowed the committee to view a list of potential hazards that could affect Lake County. Committee Risk Assessment 3-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan members were asked to then to assess the frequency, impact, and area of vulnerability for each hazard. Exercise scores were evaluated and regardless of emphasis put on the impact of the hazard or the area of vulnerability, the highest ranked hazards were Tornado, severe summer and severe winter storms, flood and extreme heat. The results are included in Table 3-2. Priority natural hazards were selected for analysis from that review. Hazards were ranked in order to provide structure and prioritize the mitigation goals and actions discussed in this ANHMP. Table 3-2 Local Planning Committee Hazard Exercise Ranking ............... Total Impact of Hazard Area of Vulnerability Severe WinteruuWXmmITITITIT Storm Tornado Tornado ___....... ........ -_..--------- �. Tornado Severe Summer Storm Severe Summer Storm Severe Summer StormtW�mITITITITIT ._..._.. Severe Winter Storm Severe Winter Storm Extreme heat Flood Extreme heat Flood Extreme heat Flood -- Drought IT Groundwater mmm ....o undwater Drought Groundwater Drought Groundwater ........ ......... _.... ..... Earthquake Earthquake Earthquake Erosion Erosion Erosion Dam Failure Dam Failure �mmITITITIT� re Dam Failure Seiche —....... _.� Seiche Seiche __....... Wildfire Wildfire Wildfire Table 3-3 presents a list of all disaster and emergency declarations that have occurred in Lake County, according to the FEMA. This list presents the foundation for identifying what hazards pose the greatest risk within Lake County. Table 3-3 Presidential Disaster(DR) And Emergency Declarations (EM) In Lake County ........ Declaration Number Date Event Details 194-DR April 25, 1965 Tornadoes, Severe Storms, Flooding OEP 227-DR April 25, 1967 Tornadoes OEP 373-DR April 26, 1973 Severe Storms, Flooding FEMA3068-EM January 16, 1979 66 -.... . zzards and Snowstorms s ....FEMA 77...... .......�� .�.�.... ..... ...... 6-DR October 7, 1986 Severe Storms, Flooding FEMA 997-DR Jmm _S.....---IT _.. my 9, 1993 Severe Storms, Flooding FEMA 1110-DR Ap.....r _....... ril 23, 1996 Tornadoes, Severe Storms ............_--- __--........• ___.... FEMA 3134 EM January 8, 1999 Winter Sno o w Storm FEMA3161 EM.. ........--- 17,��. _. January 17 2001 Severe Winter Storm FEMA 3230 EM September ITITIT�7,2005 Hurricane Katrina Evacuation FEMA 1729 DR _.... September 25, 2007 Severe Stor-mIT ms, Flooding .-. .. ...... FEMA 3283 EM March 13,2008 Snow _......_ ...._.. .FEMA 1771-DR June 24,2008 Severe Storms, Flooding FEMA 1960 DR March WW1mm ............ _. _.... 7, 2011 Severe Winter Storm and Snowstorm Risk Assessment 3-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Note that four federal disasters were declared in Lake County since the adoption of the 2006 ANHMP. Also, while Lake County was not included, Cook County to the south of Lake County had two disasters declared: DR 1800 for flooding on September 13, 2008 and DR 1935 for flooding in July-August 2010. Lake County was impacted by these events,but damage did not warrant the county being included in the declaration. Based on the input from the LPC and the record of hazard events in Lake County, the priority hazards for this 2012 ANHMP update include: • Flood • Tornado • Severe Summer Storms • Severe Winter Storms • Dam Failure • Temperature • Extremes Drought • Earthquake Some of these hazards can be interrelated. For example, severe thunderstorms can produce high winds which can cause tornado activity. Thus discussion of these hazards may overlap where necessary throughout this risk assessment. Also, some hazardous elements includes lightning and hail activity; discussion of seiche and derechos. The risk assessment for priority hazards such as severe storms and floods, include a hazard analysis and a vulnerability assessment. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and dam failure, include only a hazard profile in this ANHMP update. Table 3-4 summarized the status of hazards considered in the 2006 ANHMP and this update of that risk assessment. As shown, hazards were either continued, deleted, changed, or new hazards were identified. Risk Assessment 3-3 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-4 Evaluation Of Hazards For Inclusion In 2011 Risk Assessment 2006 HAZARD Status Notes 2011 Hazard �. ...... ....... ......... Flood Continued Flood _........ ......... ��_.. ......... igh W Hind Changed Incorporated into Severe Summer Severe Summer Storms Storms ........... - _............... ._ Tornado Continued Tornado Severe Thunderstorm Changed Incorporated mmITITITITITIT mmmmmm with Severe Summer Severe Summer Storms Storms Hail Changed Incorporated with Severe Summer Severe Summer Storms... Storms Severe Winter Storm Continued...................... Severe Winter Storm .................. ...... ... �. ..... Dam Failure Continued Dam Failure m Wildfire Deleted Based on the Review of the Lake N/A County Planning Committee this was deemed a hazard not to profile in the plan update. Ravine Bank Erosion Changed Modified the Hazard to be Erosion Erosion (Coastal and Ravine) (Coastal and Ravine) Lake Erosion Changed Modifi�mmmmmIT ed the Hazard to be Erosion Erosion (Coastal and Ravine) (Coastal and Ravine) Extreme Heat Changed Hazard profileprofile expanded to include -Tem e.._ g p p rature Extremes not only extremes in heat but cold temperature extremes as well. _._ ._mm....... .. _ ......... Drought New Hazard Based on the Review of the Lake Drought County Planning Committee this was deemed a hazard that needed to be profiled for the county. Earthquake New Hazard Based on the Review Review of the Lake Earthquake County Planning Committee this was deemed a hazard that needed to be profiled for the county. 3.2 Summary of Lake County Assets Lake County assets include people, buildings, infrastructure, businesses and institutions, the land and natural resources. Assets are summarized in Table 3-5 for purposes of evaluating potential hazards against the potential damage or loss of assets. Chapter 1 of this ANHMP presented population, workforce, land use, development trend and critical facility data. That data, plus data developed for the 2006 ANHMP is used in this Chapter. Due to a stalled national and regional Risk Assessment 3-4 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-5 Summary of Lake County Assets People Numbers Population* 703,462 Buildings: Residential Buildings* 260,310 Non-Government, Non-Residential** 38,000 Churches *** 329 Hospitals *** 11 Schools (k-12)*** 205 Colleges*** 7 Government Owned*** 189 Transportation:*** Roads (Miles) 3,902 Bridges 878 Airports 7 Rail Stations 34 Resources:*** Forest Preserves (Acres) 29,300 State Parks (4) (Acres) 7,925 Community Parks (694) (Acres) 8,181 Golf Courses (56) (Acres) 9,151 Agricultural (Acres) 33,376 *2010 Census **2006 ANHMP ***Other County or Municipal or Township Sources economy, the 2006 ANHMP estimates for building value and market value were determined to be sufficient for 2011 hazard risk assessment. Table 3-6 summarized the number of building in the Lake County municipalities and the unincorporated portion of the County. Based on an analysis conducted by the State of Illinois for 2010 Illinois Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, Lake County has a median value of$198,200. According to the 2010 Census the 2005-2009 median value for Lake County was $288,600. This higher median value will be used in this risk assessment. The 2010 Census has the total number of housing units estimated to be 260,310. Table 3-6 shown the total number of structures in Lake County at 297,997. This leaves a consideration of 2005 building count to 2010 residential building count leaves as estimate of 38,000 non residential buildings. The 2010 non-residential building count is certainly higher and can be evaluated in the next update of this ANHMP. The total market value for all structures in Lake County was estimated to be approximately$58 billion. Again, given the current economy, this estimate of$58 billion will be used in this update. Risk Assessment 3-5 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-6 Summary of Lake County Buildings and Building Value %Of #of._..__.. Total ... � Value*** Mumcipalit Structures County Bwldin Value Market Va Village of Antioch 4,625 1.65% $269,628,763 $862,812 042 Village of Bannockburn 530 0.19 9 , _..3 g .........mmmmmmmmITIT % -�$95,905,629 $306,898,013 Village of B... .......� .._...._ ..__.... ........_... g Barrington 2,035 0.73%ITIT ^ ___ mmmmmITIT $200,328,883 $641,052,426 Village of Barrington Hills 483 0.17% $61,011,159 $195 235,709 Village of Beach Park 7,261 2.59% $178,558,871 $571,388,387 Village of Buffalo Grove 7,271 2.60% $1,009,715,871 $3 231 090,787 Village of Deer Park 1,416 0.51% $156,164,567 $499,726,614 Village of Deerfield 7,209 2.57% $775,904,271 $2 482 893,667 Village of Fox Lake 4,740 1.69/0 $196,831,979 $629,862,333 g _ ,011 $60,950,435 Village of Fox RiverwwGrove 145 _ 0.05016 $19 047 Village of Grayslake 7,227 2.58% $418,205,018 $1,338,256,058 Village of Green Oaks _ 1,894 0 68/ m $166,542,290 $532,935,32 Village of Gurnee 10,147 3.62% $888,650,307 $2 843,680,982 Village of Hainesville 1,041 0.37% $62,052,109 $198,566,749 Village of Hawthorn Woods 2,366 0.85% $264,906,516 $847700,851 _.... _... ...�, . City of Highland Park 13,202 4.72% $1,304,322,315 $4,173,831,408 ................. _.. City of Highwood 1,591 0.57% $90,822,733 $290,632,746 Village °/0 of Indian Creek 247 0.09 ... 9,184 $45,181,389 Village of Island Lake 1,505 0.54% $62 588,581 $200,283,459 Village of Kildeer 1,542 0.55% _ mmmmmmITITITIT ITITIT WWWWµmmmmITIT-Y ^ ........ $187,695,067 $600,624,214 Village of Lake Barrington 1,827 0.65% $285,744,737 $914 383,158 Village of Lake Bluff 2,828 1.01/o $314,853,988 $1,007,532,762 ._ ...... Forest 8,456 3.02% $1,482,952 644 m $4 745 448,461 City of Lake -------- Village of Lake Villa 2,794 1.00% $175,649,911 $562,079,715 Village ...... ._� $534,872,479 . of Lake Zurich 7,469 2.67% $1,711,591,933 Village of Lakemoor 910 0.33% $46,553,019 $148,969,661 __. _ _., Village of Libertyville 8,481 3.03% 255,555 .............. ............�. $689 454,861 $2,206 ITITIT Village of Lincolnshire 2,212 0.79% $461,786,607 $1,477,717,142 ............... _._ Village of Lindenhurst 5,261 1.88% $296,491,944 $948,774,221 v Village of Long Grove 3,263 1.17% $413,146,388 $1,322,068,442 Village of Mettawa 436 0.16/o $42,639,906 $136,447,699 W W....... W W W Village of Mundelein 11,420 4.08% $600,266,774 $1,920,853,677 Villa ,e of North Barrington 1459 0.5........_ mmIT . g g ° $ 6,973,964 $726 316,685 Village of Northbrook - 0.00% $0 $0 ........... ........ City of North Chicago 7,704 2.75% $226 595 359 $725,105,149 1___,�.080/. $6,909,874 $22,1 Village of Old Mill Creek 233 � . ...... ....... .. 11,597 City of Park City 2,486 0.89% $33,522,705 $107,272,656 Village of Port Barrington 180 0.06% $17,773,805 $56,876,176 Village of Riverwoods 1,812 0.65% $244,104,488 $781,134 362 Round Village of R _ ....._....� ...._.... ..,, .. ........ Lake 4,132 1.48% $194,367,748 $621,976,794 Village of Round Lake Beach0 10,251 3.66% $327,216,077 $1,047,091,446 Village of Round mmm,3 ...... g nd Lake Heights 1,142 0.41% $35 561,335 $113,796,272 g _ ........._ ._ � 89 1.25%_ _. 620,298 Village Round Lake Park 3 4 $47,068,843 $150 Village of Third Lake 520 0.19% $26,896,691 $86,069 411 Village of Tower Lakes 466 0.17 ......_.......� _.... $55,132,882 $176 425,222 Village o .�-................_ ._ _ ............ � ... _....... _._ g f Vernon Hills 5,741 2.05% $773,060,114 $2,473,792 365 Village of Volo 897 0.32% $14,798,185 $47 354,192 __._......_ _ ..._ Village of Wadsworth 2,495 0.89% $107,419,511 $343,742 435 Village of Waucond ..1.7 3 da 4,880 1.74% $232,494,103 $743,951,130 City of Waukegan 30,413 10.860. $1,053,649,345 $3,371,677,904 Risk Assessment 3-6 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan %of #of Total Municipalit, ww Structures* County Buildinq Value" Market Value*** Village of Wheeling 5 0.00% $1,772,449 $5 671 837 Village of Winthroparbor 4,033 .....7,9 , IT IT _... 9 P ° $107,958,989 $345,468,765 City of Zion 9,977 3.56% $319,278,427 $1,021,690,966 ........ ...... ..........______...... ___ .a..... Unincorporated Lake County 55,848 19.95% $2,233,793,222 $7,148,138,310 Lake County Totals 279,997 mpp �.. $18,053 762Ty498 $57,772,039,994 'number of structures based off 2002 aerial photos and updated with 2004 aerial photos **based on the tax assessed value as of 03 Oct 2005 ***using 3.2 as a multiplier 3.3 Flood A flood is a natural event for rivers and streams and occurs when a normally dry area is inundated with water. Excess water from snowmelt or rainfall accumulates and overflows onto the stream banks and adjacent floodplains. As illustrated in Figure 3-1, floodplains are lowlands, adjacent to rivers, streams and creeks that are subject to recurring floods. Flash floods, usually resulting from heavy rains or rapid snowmelt, can flood areas not typically subject to flooding, including urban areas. Extreme cold temperatures can cause streams and rivers to freeze, causing ice jams and creating flood conditions. Figure 3-1 Description of a Floodplain Special Flood Hazard Ar _._.... GO.Ye r Flood laird µ ....r Flood Fringe -, Floodway------- � ..FFhaacl Fringe -"� Bast Flood Elevation I� i G Floods are considered hazards when people and property are affected. In Illinois, flooding occurs commonly and can occur during any season of the year from a variety of sources. Pipelines, bridges, and other infrastructure can be damaged when high water combines with flood debris. Basement flooding can cause extensive damage. Flooding can cause extensive Risk Assessment � 3-7 �� W�* �* June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan damage to crop lands. Several factors determine the severity of floods, including rainfall intensity and duration, topography and ground cover. Riverine flooding originates from a body of water, typically a river, creek, or stream, as water levels rise onto normally dry land. Water from snowmelt, rainfall, freezing streams, ice flows, or a combination thereof, causes the river or stream to overflow its banks into adjacent floodplains. Winter flooding usually occurs when ice in the rivers creates dams or streams freeze from the bottom up during extreme cold spells. Spring flooding is usually the direct result of melting winter snow packs, heavy spring rains, or a combination of the two. Flash floods can occur anywhere when a large volume of water flows or melts over a short time period, usually from slow moving thunderstorms or rapid snowmelt. Because of the localized nature of flash floods, clear definitions of hazard areas do not exist. These types of floods often occur rapidly with significant impacts. Rapidly moving water, only a few inches deep, can lift people off their feet, and only a depth of a foot or two, is needed to sweep cars away. Most flood deaths result from flash floods. Urban flooding or local drainage problems can occur anywhere in Lake County. Most local drainage problems result in shallow flooding on roads, yards and, sometimes, in buildings. In some areas, a development is actually located in a drainageway or in a depressional ponding area. Inadequately maintained drainage ditches, undersized storm sewers, and failing tile drains or storm sewers are common causes of local flooding. Local drainage problems have the greatest damage impact on homes with drive-down basement garages and split-level homes in ,,, low lying areas. In the case of drive-down k garages, water accumulating on the street finds a low driveway and fills a home's basement. Split-level homes provide easy access for surface floodwaters to enter through the ground level windows. p Since much of Lake County was once tiled to provide drainage for farmland failed or Houses "` � uses with drive-down garages are susceptible to inadequate drain tiles are a large problem in street flooding and local drainage problems the developing areas of the county. Many ,m tiles are old and were not designed to handle the stormwater loads that development produces. The same is also true for older storm sewer systems. Most storm drains and road culverts are not designed to carry more than the 10-year storm. Depressional flooding is common in Lake County. Lake County has a gently rolling landscape that includes many depressional areas left from the Wisconsin Glacial Period. The common problem with development in many of these depressional areas is that there is no natural outlet for runoff. Some depressions are former wetlands that are drained with field tiles originally installed to make them farmable. In many cases the tiles are old, in disrepair, and often have Risk Assessment 3-8 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan limitations for handling the increased volumes of runoff that result from development. When the drainage system for depressional areas becomes overloaded, runoff will simply fill up a depression. Without an adequate outlet, the floodwater will remain until it evaporates, seeps into the ground or trickles through a tile. Sanitary Sewer Backups. There are few combined sewers in Lake County where stormwater and wastewater discharges are transported in the same pipe system. Therefore, most of the sanitary sewer backups are caused by infiltration of stormwater into the sanitary sewer pipes, leaky manholes and inappropriate connections from residential storm drains, roof drains and sump pumps to sanitary sewer lines. In some places excess stormwater in sanitary sewers causes manhole covers to lift off, and sewage finds its way into rivers and lakes via the storm drainage system. The contamination of surface waters with sewage degrades water quality by adding fecal coliform and excess nutrients that reduce dissolved oxygen in the water and can lead to the spread of communicable diseases. Beach closures and swimming bans are a common result. Erosion and Sedimentation. Areas prone to the most erosion damage are the bluffs and ravines, lake shores, and high energy flow streams. Channelized stream reaches are less stable and more erosive than meandering sections. Erosion will be discussed in Section 3.11. 3.3.1 Lake County Watersheds There are four major watersheds in Lake County, which are shown in Exhibit 3-1 along with 26 subwatersheds: The Fox River Watershed in located on the western side of Lake County. The Fox River originates in Wisconsin and flows into the Fox Chain O' Lakes. A summary of the Fox River Watershed is presented in Table 3-7. The water surface elevations in the Chain O' Lakes are controlled by the Stratton Lock and Dam (McHenry Lock and Dam, which is located in Kane County and operated by the IDNR-OWR. Most days, discharge at McHenry Lock and Dam allow for lake levels for boat navigation and property protection. During flood events, sluice gates are opened to allow flood flows to pass downstream, however discharges must be balanced between potential flood damage in Lake County and potential flood damage in Kane County. The Figure 3-2 and Figure 3-2 are from the January 2010 "Operation of the Stratton and Algonquin Dams"report prepared by IDNR-OWR. The report is available online at: http://www.dnr.state.il.us/owr/includes/Stratton0perations/content Stratton0perations3.htm. Figure 3-3 presents the operational constraints that IDNR-OWR has for opening and closing the Stratton Dam gates. Risk Assessment 3-9 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 717 r �w 6 �dflf ALN,'at;.m.FJ� � � rr �t � rvri�r�R,Pr�r. err SP artRr ymyrY d wrrm r�wr71 % ,r alEhua�n F ivu Vr'a vgev �4 OL!}16-0[LL CREEK Y �q Np"81"A H bT,KNJ4 411 W"k.w4p"tKKSRPH l ��4 YNE''NLa S; kwNOE d'NdPNIRr"';.� � iADCQ:".wu IIr.,FSYr F,D w w AAC ti 41 bo I ^,Px,AY f I l l 7^ ) 4 ¢ Y Er"7ON,tl"O d.,V(S HEIGHr5 p�rC7flAP'dPFNSVF NtEaf,,`6{ 09Sr't."aP;7yz fdCd P _ 6 s 4b89daNVEk"""" , rr rr".� R$,1YA8A'"1..NLAICEF.KA7d+ Y 6 >A„qJ'V F, GR.n'6"SLAKE'.. A e�.oaaz' f b r NtKR4PArdS .HE 1 °�� Q . �ww�°k� WC IMP&NAk 4tY8%LEA �' ul�8f�i f ki 8,„Kd•%E'wh6NPwhPp u'8'rY ntf tAr yr7x'u d&JG81P::Y7 ry� ! VOLO 4 0 � " Ai no I0(,,A& „DE 4n lCd.'.RdVCP CR@ENd CIAAE NP rtl Y 1 dtarr .�da M. CdEER"'N'4 �Ld.E k Uk "KE"P.DR.OFF L t", rm 4 urL r',aa yam a r rt rwc. a n r �. KAtNuNV rim t Nti",W'K'N"R.NYY HNdMN`Ni�N'P'JVW ^"""` ", -w� Kp d^S', �aaclYdik.vC 6ta� d r ti CWtK'P,E FKP'RC^S"r �w dJlq�6� TOWER 1 @,W P"' ;A ( J1NEp:RP!'Ej&R'P' x rNa r r dxfiM EA' Nfi7� ftoa$ L FX Mw !!+w dolt l� K KI yPR".^Id a. ro-xP•�� Y4 �: �'r w.n n ,rm�ErbkE;rr a�uwu"� j R! fNl+K"vrt,wr wry. 9, aN aaw�El��rrn`tdw�t`ru«N � �� a' r Her tt Al t ell', ' E, wT0.PdSHNE" n�C udBp dNYNYd a,ufAC1 N rx z,PJNCMr R;PERaP,u+� ra� E7.. [.care ww� I w, Lsas�r_Krw�rL�r � EKE � �, Km.. w`,a�b76 a°R"di •""T r S �iw�.tli rh ^b dP0y1 uy1+N9'NgY w�'J4Kr"NM f,rwwP Cn�a. v" wd. r uo d e.q`P KiLDEErr irk.G :L1PN rrr c YF- �'^ r rcu¢rooaxo ,iu a3' ,p Ni Ii.I�,,Nk ""^. Rd1JEd�'4�'�"M."7 dE P7EE,Pd'RCFC 6CE.R ttNrqlNCNt'JW'4"rp'eEVm E i a (7P,k,r HErrHaa P'Cd'G.P4 � PN6E.P.dt Pn r,r��wA4pfEP7N�Pw:'aYW Nf@:"a""a4"rE,�Wb"N. � �� tl,E P „� Re NNCru";Ane spNlL � ¢ PwCRr d.w,�LC.A aPtlC of aEN » i„ � FLU Lake County Boundary Lake County, Illinois 7. Watershed Boundary Watersheds � Sub-wateshed Boundary VYC� r.. ,. ,... Caren Water nwrm S Lake ffivom and Streams Michigan Espressvuaynnteestate " �•,.. 1. -US Highway zr State Highway Major Road Major Rail ' Exhibit 3-1 Lake County Watersheds and Subwatersheds Risk Assessment 3-10 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The rural Fox River watershed has the greatest number of septic impacts with 51 flood problem sites affected. Generally, lake area homes experience the highest level of septic impact. Almost half of the Fox watershed sites that suffer from septic damage are located in the Upper Fox subwatershed in the Chain O' Lakes area. i III i ull mii� i" �u illNu I I�i iIIIPI II �1 III ✓ � /Ir °!��, � f / . r�/ /l/�� ii/irk✓�� '�j`"+ r/% '% r %/ ";D II I I r /r//r Flgp//�� f �r �✓ � A Figure 3-2 Stratton Lock and Dam (Source: IDNR-OWR) Risk Assessment 3-11 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan tam tra k as tWww+rU.S.*ta,I, twww a d1ra � aMatr o TaSwtdnklw "tot Cited toraz ! �aW2tXfit��w" ,, _ a ° Nip" omlrtk p INII bk 11t.L 31 +I� trwwartwwxw�w tWwrwlt t1mrd t�� a lr rtanntu�u�r �h�r -A, ° W.k6ar't IB05d ° s-i fI g %whop neadirater stage ks keys thar/3.5 nm tW c rrm r'aar�al °rrn U u.Stratton Lank axi9 x S1W 6tt,CFMX t r t;aats cant of t tltt dap ttl tt t t,slatMww. at:� i ttra9 aar McWlaht� 5k Ztructures that flov,d�arrp�ox. 3 x on 1"aiton,t"'^rw g�gcj "I r aatpx'x w ttst Flunsl °°� - ProWppwa� trv�atdW r�wru� "^� ,� fE aat tprf, ttWt tUarar � w ox Valley Caatd0M tr 'rture thgl 'WOO o m, .. „�✓1, ^w,,,,,„.w,•" "' tlyalaa,:t Or�ir.that r1 dµNkd .tttl^#b�t` na,a Roar Arez „. l' wwnryawgara Wt suw;" ° "1'rul t M dt Mind �a�t4avd � kofiil rrluai�twm tr Lr"5. 1A*M= 7 ) � wwh�� 49w a wcwwx { � � tlww�r'1,tkt �'ttwtw�4�`dts,µrud e o M Figure 3-3 Operational Constraints Stratton Lock and Dam Source: IDNR-OWR Watershed-based plans have been developed for Fish Lake Drain, Flint Creek, Squaw Creek and Sequoit Creek and are available at: littla://wwr 1 j<CC0Unt r aterst)eds/1'ages/W t rshe N ana Lyemen t l <a-s Risk Assessment 3-12 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-7 Fox River Watershed in Lake County Fox River Watershed: Area: Municipalities: 163 square miles Antioch Lake Villa 35% of County Barrington Lake Zurich Public Land: Barrington Hills North Barrington 12,816 acres Fox Lake Round Lake Wetlands: Fox River Grove Round Lake Beach Hainesville Round Lake Heights Subwatersheds: Area (miZ): Hawthorn Woods Round Lake Park Upper Fox 32.7 Island Lake Tower Lakes Sequoit Creek 15.3 Lakemoor Volo Lower Fox 8.4 Lake Barrington Wauconda Fish Lake Drain 38.4 Squaw Creek 9.4 Townships: Mutton Creek 10.9 Antioch Fremont Slocum Lake Drain 11.0 Avon Grant Tower Lake Drain 10.2 Cuba Lake Villa Flint Creek 26.7 Ela Wauconda The Upper Des Plaines River watershed is located in northeastern Illinois, Lake and Cook Counties, and Kenosha and Racine Counties in southeastern Wisconsin. A summary of the watershed is presented in Table 3-8. The Upper Des Plaines is subject to significant flooding caused by lack of channel capacity of the mainstem of the Des Plaines River and tributaries to carry major flows during storms. Historical flooding in 1986 and 1987 resulted in over $100 million in damages. The main stems of the Fox and Des Plaines Rivers have flood characteristics that are very different from the other major watershed of the county. The Fox and Des Plaines Rivers experience their worst floods from rain events that last a few days, or from a series of small rain events over a longer duration. The greatest flooding along the Fox and Des Plaines occurs following longer rain events. The floods of 1960 and 1986 resulted from long steady rains which eventually overwhelmed the available floodplain storage and set new flood stage records on the Fox and Des Plaines Rivers respectively. The 1986 event resulted from 10 days of widespread steady rain. It took the Des Plaines 4 weeks to pass this floodwater. For the larger Fox River, the time to pass this flood was 6 weeks. In comparison, the smaller watershed of the Skokie River drained down to normal only a few days after the rains ended. Long-duration rain events on snow packs can also cause major flooding on the larger rivers. Exhibit 3-1 and Exhibit 1-1 in Chapter 1 of this ANHMP show the lakes located within the Fox River and Des Plaines River Watersheds. The lakes are a resource and also a concern when the Fox River and Des Plaines Rivers are at flood stage for extended periods and lake levels are elevated as a result Risk Assessment 3-13 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-8 Des Plaines River Watershed in Lake County Des Plaines River Watershed ..... ..........._,� Area: 202 mil Municipalities: 42%of County Antioch Indian Creek Mundelein Public Land: 11,730 acres Beach Park Kildeer Old Mill Creek Wetlands: 20,595 acres Buffalo Grove Lake Villa Riverwoods Round Lake Deer Park Lake Zurich Beach Round Lake Grayslake Libertyville Park Green Oaks Lincolnshire Third Lake Subwatersheds: Area(m12): Gurnee Lindenhurst Vernon Hills North Mill Creek 21.5 Hainesville Long Grove Wadsworth Newport Drain 8.4 Hawthorn Woods Mettawa Wheeling Mill Creek 3.1 Upper Des Plaines 53 Townships: Bull Creek/Bull's Brook 12.3 Antioch Lake Villa Warren Indian Creek 37.7 Avon Libertyville Waukegan Lower Des Plaines 18.2 Benton Newport West Deerfield Buffalo Creek 13.7 Ela Vernon Zion A takisic Creek 6.3 Freemont Watershed-based plans have been developed for North Mill Creek, Bull Creek and Indian Creek and are available at: httr):/Iwww.lakecountvil.gov/Stormwater/LakeCountyWatersheds Pa es WatershedMana em entPlans.aspx North Branch Chicago River Watershed is noted for three long and narrow subwatersheds surrounding the 3 forks of the North Branch of the river. A summary of the watershed is presented in Table 3-9. Floods on these long and narrow watersheds are affected by the direction taken by a storm. On the three forks, the worst flooding is caused by storms that move from north to south. The runoff moves under the storm front and concentrates as it goes downstream. Storms that pass east to west produce smaller floods, and storms that pass south to north produce the smallest floods. The worst floods are caused by day-long rain events, but,because the watershed is so narrow, short intense rain events can also cause severe local flooding. The flood of record on the Skokie River in Highland Park was caused by a thunderstorm that rained only in the southern end of the watershed. Because of the channelization of these three forks, floodwaters usually drain away in just a few days. For more information on the North Branch Chicago River Watershed, see the "North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan" (2008) for Lake and Cook Counties, Illinois, which is available the SMC website at: liter;// ._....w.ik.ec �utaimIT �o ° Soy av terd,ak "ou� w ac° l�e , 1 a :° i�ecrgenet. Risk Assessment 3-14 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-9 North Branch of the Chicago River Watershed in Lake County omRiver Watershed � .. North Branch Chicag o Area: 202 square miles Municipalities: 11%of County Bannockburn Highwood North Chicago Public Land: 1,655 acres Deerfield Lake Bluff Park City Wetlands: 4,390 acres Green Oaks Lake Forest Riverwoods Gurnee Lincolnshire Waukegan Highland Park Mettawa Subwatersheds: Area(m12): Townships: West Fork 8.6 Deerfield Vernon Waukegan Middle Fork 19.8 Libertyville Warren West Deerfield Skokie River 21.9 Shields Along Lake Michigan there are several small subwatersheds dominated by urban conditions. In these watersheds, systems of storm drains deliver runoff to the ravines that drain into the lake. A Summary of the watershed is presented in Table 3-10. Intense rain events overwhelm the storm drains and can cause significant localized flooding problems that are relatively short in duration. The rapid rise and fall of water levels and velocities in the ravines have resulted in severe erosion. Table 3-10 Lake Michigan Watersheds in Lake County Lake Michigan Watersheds Area: 59.3 square miles Municipalities: 12%of County Beach Park North Chicago Public Land: 5,215 acres Highwood Winthrop Harbor Wetlands: 12532 acres Highland Park Waukegan Lake Bluff Zion Subwatersheds: Area(m1 2): Lake Forest Kellogg Creek 8.9 Dead River 18.7 Townships: Waukegan River 17.6 Benton Waukegan Pettibone Creek 4.2 Deerfield West Deerfield Bluff/Ravine 9.9 Shields Zion Watershed-based management plans have been developed for Kellogg Creek, Dead River and the Waukegan River by the Lake County SMC. They are available at the Lake County SMC website. Also, more information on the all the Lake County watersheds can be found at: l il.�o rl" orm x�l c a 1 t a w J /J' __ to s edM nwyeineil T" s Risk Assessment 3-15 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.3.2 Flood Hazard Profile Table 3-11 Floodplain se Exhibit 3-2 shows mapped regulatory floodplains and floodways Land U. in Lake County, which cover 52,100 acres. Mapped regulatory Use Floodplain Land Percent of Floodplain floodplains are defined as the area of land, which is inundated Agriculture ITITIT with water during 100-year flood events. For a historical r ...... 2.7 mmm comparison of flooding in Lake County, the USGS Hydrologic disturbed Land 0.3 Atlas (1963, 1968)places 52,898 acres within areas inundated as Water 33.5 part of today's regulatory floodplains and floodways. Lake Wetland 23.9 County , Industrial —� 0.2 Coun has also identified 428 areas that cover 7 956 acres of In_mmstrial wmm land with local drainage and flooding problems. Over half of Open Space 32.8 these areas reside outside of regulatory floodways and commercial 1.2 floodplains. Table 3-11 shows the percent of area land use in the Residential — 3.6 Lake County 100-year floodplain, and a summary of the ..............nt ....—mmITIT 1:9 floodplain land area is shown in Table 3-12. Govemme Table 3-12 Lake County Estimate of Flood Prone Land Flood Areas Acres Square %of County ..._._ my Miles Area Foodplains and"Floodways 52,108 81.......�. 42 17% Flood of Record.._.. �.._.... �.. 52.... .... �_... 898 82.65 18% .._ ...... .. .......__ ............ — Source:�Lake County_.__-Regional Framework Plan 2001 The floodplains mapped in Exhibit 3-2 and the data in Table 3-12 have been developed from the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) for Lake County and the Lake County Flood Insurance Study(FIS) is dated November 16, 2000. FEMA and IDNR have developed preliminary GIS-based floodplain maps for Lake County. As of April 2012, a letter of final determination has not been issued by FEMA, which means that the November 16, 2000 FIS and associated FIRMs are still the effective FIS and floodplain maps for Lake County. SMC Flood Problem Areas Inventory: In 1995 — 1996, the SMC conducted a flood damage inventory to identify flood problem areas. This was done with contacts and personal interviews with cities, villages, townships, home owner associations, county agencies, county board members, private organizations and individuals. Problem sites were identified by subwatersheds and numbered. A standardized"Flood Problem Areas" information worksheet was developed for each site and pertinent information was added as it was obtained. A resident input questionnaire was also developed to gather additional information on local flooding problems. The problem areas were included on the County's GIS. Over 300 identified flood problem sites were field inspected to verify problem area boundaries, assess the flood problem, and identify suitable mitigation solutions for the flood hazard area. The inventory only identifies areas experiencing historic flood damage to property and infrastructure. Flooding of open space and vacant land were not inventoried or mapped. Risk Assessment 3-16 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 17 54 A a�v 99 9 ow YMW w 44 �. k� w r " TRA Wv if 8 nr bre " j +r`jus ,b i� «yua �d ��w ti� xirU �, w iou i r 1 .Wry it M4y IWO " �'Ix l Y 1 w �a—M4 vcakrrc w 6q �9 " w 4.ayau1 i w,k " f'� % ,a M y� 'dk4-1 w SAAW rVi pAOd,. P1PYSi°w r z i ,„rp p. � �u,�oKhk~ rfl'N"lla..d�FA 6 � . I k ud£'"74R£" k p W p V•'J'kAM �JVae9.'7q� a�Vfr..{o�dk"�,-d'Vb �'.PW?h4E .fidGU�aR'��g,�"y t�N". �aV� w rm M clzi nS Dulzx,` Lake County, Illinois M 4 =,TM, 10T Rar Rood,plain ., F oodway cmE 0 My r , "3` Exhibit 3-2 Lake County 100 Year Floodplain and Floodway Risk Assessment 347 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The flood problems areas and inventory data was used for the development of the 2004 Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan. A summary of the problems area inventory is provided in Table 3-13 for the major Lake County watersheds and Exhibit 3-3 shows the mapped flood problem areas. More detailed information can be found in that Flood Mitigation Plan. Note that a flood problem site may include multiple buildings, roads or other infrastructure, and than one type of flooding may occur at a problem site. Table 3-13 Lake County Flood Problem Area Inventory Summary �_..... .........�... ................ Fox Des Plaines Lake North Branch .... 11 _ 9_. Chicago River Total: T e of Floodin and Number of Sites: River River Michi ammm Overbank Flooding 72 28 3 17 120 Local Drainage Problems 52 29 20 11 112 Depressional Flooding 49 29 5 6 89 Septic Problems 0 1 1 Sewer Back-up 6 1 5 1 13 Associated Erosion 1 1 2 4 Total: 180 89 35 35 339 Flood Problem Site Locations: Floodplain 112 7 7 22 148 (Floodway:) (8) (2) (2) (14) (26) Outside Floodplain 68 28 28 13 137 Critical Facilities Subject to Flooding or Closure: 8 1 4 7 20 Roads and Bddqes Threatened b odign 146 mmmIT�67 .._.29 31 273 ... ...„*Sites reported multiple problems in these categories An examination of National Flood Insurance Policies and Flood Insurance claims highlights the number of communities that have been impacted by past flooding. Table 3-14 shows Lake County community flood insurance coverage and flood insurance claims since 1978. Note that policies are show for an entire community, including the portions of communities that are in other counties. More information is available about the Lake County flooding at: litti :I/w\ w...lw l oti t'vs ' "()v,/Storiiiwatet/`FLo ,Li foriiiatioii/1l�v-_e,-,/I)ei till tLll, Risk Assessment 3-18 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan p_ wv+ar�,wW°a'� A�ri„� � ...,,...... G` .a ww D ka, PIV; � � oW r u tl u4LLo' It a 454. TIL '� x ry r wo tiaan 1 _ an l r aamr +m"ra 9 a 4a d+G„M'Gard.G LIN. �iAh' Y lYUlf N va " D"a2 " ai r�araWhur YdR,ESwrl°'DG 7. nY q , , �v Nam LAIRd B p ... "ifl��' �p M � p i➢A G '�, '�- � � ' '4. N'+f � S�'. pn Dw fD 1�4 W'Sui:AL,4W�1�.CPn'�g xw R n 4d.,. �.,,, PI °� " «y + N -,w a LASER L G3".�+�w�C 1..FN F � m �, aa.uµ�. «„ -, ,, wran 111c, ��ryG p ,. * Jk".nJq+AG+w'=y.,� w u 6 Sao M D -0 At, G IND far S" � w� JrP6„ M y i .G a ,P aj wrww r 0 0; w wru.* ..dam a.Dau�an ILX Ias r 1. *awuwae,..� �wa1E'G�w�r :DD,ri r Rn 9�Z.,,:, Dada+Haag w� µ Lake arr�r:;� sr�rG ra r ;vu,rrr l � :�r :- I :r,ca Lake County, llIC1iD1S Flood Problem Areas G x U`. P"{ighid'x�ay � i..ocia; I,�'dra' �',B�i'Pm-ti�enis.n r 2,.....__ N'i�rfifla3'",.R.�.k�.C: �% rF v`w-3Ytl lhje' ,r��Ad k"."u1-C '_'.:;' CIIc Failure a �'NeaDroiirva��r µ' .. - — Pw%,.3ja Rail �r7 o�rr.r Ri,, man.- ',rI F::-DA^n.IDO `(e;a f cc,,"a hI: Exhibit 3-3 Lake County"Flood Problem Areas" wm�rtmwamwn� w 9+ mremwadamwmm�m�rcwmrvimmmm WpwvsmwwroWrvhuvrdw muwwuwm. in�"immm �mm.. i mE. w�m�.'u nHnr Risk Assessment 3-19 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-14 Lake County Flood Insurance Active Policies and Claims, FEMA 2011 .......__ ..... Number of Total Total Number of Coverage Claims* Total Paid CommuCommunityActive Policies Premium� m..... ITIT� .... ._..... ......_. _.... ..... 4 Villaqe of Antioch 79 $80,203 $16,801,200 66 $297,19m Village of Bannockburn 3 $1,195 $ 1,050,000 1 $ _.... Vi_aqe of Barrington* 36 $18,330 $ 8,713,600 23 $112,771 ......._.. Village of Barrington Hills* _ 13 _ m $13,823 $ 3,680,700 5 mmIT $ 39,219 Villaqe of Beach Park 31......... _$31,584 $ 6,158,300 10 $ 67,862 Buffalo Grove* 63 $46,324___. .._..� $15,664,30 43 0 16 $ 38,545 Vdlla �:of Villaqe of Deer Park* 5 .....:..� $4,183 ,$ 1,725,000 1 $ Village of Deerfield* 144 $ 108,783 $39,742,600 163 _ $ 1,245,151 Villaqe of Fox Lake* 303 $ 323,156 $60 926 500 220 $905,266 ..__.... Village of Fox River Grove* 31 $38,051 $ 6,966,100 18 $ 54,272 Villa a of Gra yslake 61 p$56,852 $13 419,800 5 $ 14,412 IT Village of Green Oaks _ IT 14 mmmmmITITITIT $16,936 .__. min$ 3,317,000 2wmmITITITIT $ 3,689 Village of Gurnee 119 $ 188 636 $34,587,300 77 $ 1,860,602 Villa e of Hainesville 1 $333 ..... $280,000 0 $ --- Village of Hawthorn Wood ..... s 14 $16,433 $ 3,795,000 0 $ mm Cite of Highland Park 161 $ 167,868 $45,566,100 101 $207,112 ....._ _ .............___. _.............. Cit of Highwood 0 $ - $ 0 $ Vq!a e of Indian Creek........ 0 ... ... $ ....... ....... $ 0 $ -__.a... * �� .............. _. � 4 q 743 Village of Island Lake 35 $24 526 $ 7,955,700 1 Village of Kildeer _.„mmmm 19 �$22,694 $ 5,520,000 2 $ Villa a of Lake Barrin ton 17 $ 12,504 $ 4,568,400 4 $ 20,806- .ww.. Villaqe of Lake Bluff -_m 10 _.........�$3,660 $ 2,871 800 0 $ ":..... y s _ �.....68 _3 $18,716,100 31 $ 85,982 City of Lake Forest 68 $63,553mm �.. Village of Lake Villa 14 $10,270 $ 3,239,600 16 $ 17,563 Village of Lake Zurich 15 $6,291 $ 3,980,000 mmmm 3 $ww 3,734 Village of Lakemoor* 31 $24,331 $ 4,368,300 5 ._ mmITm,m m $ 6,760ww„ Villa a of Libert ille 149 $ 199,286 $35,587,000 57 $396,547 .. _. _.. 9 $218 460 Villa, a of Lincolnshire 113 $ 113.929 $32,609,800 1 _.._......._._. ___ _...._. _.. .. , 2,599,000 7 $ 37,337 Villa e of Lindenhurst 10 $4 910 $ Villa e of Long Grove 39 $38,345 �$12,166200 5 $ 13,267 Villa e of Mettawa 5 $5 059 $ 1,530,000 1 $ 8,558 .. _.. .. _. _... ... ,Village of Mundelein 48 $49,580 $11,808,700 199 3579$ 6mmm Village of North Barrington 19 $14,713 $ 5,395,900 3 _ $ -_ W W W W W ...... Cit of North Chica o 10 $4,540 $ 1,641,500 7 $ 22,788 .. _._. ................... _ ..... ..__. mm Village of OIdWMill Creek ,�wwwwww_OIT $ �$ 1 $ 7,433ITITITIT� City of Park City 30 $13,835 $ 4,973,300 0 $ in to n* 44 $47,485 IT $ 9,757,600 ..... .. 47 $199,026 Villaqe of Port Barr g Villaqe of Riverwoods 90 mmm$86,894 $28,749,100 19 $ 49,587 Village of Round Lake 15 $ 14,672 $ 2,548,700 ............ 13 $ 22,743 .,Villaqe of Round Lake Beachmm„ 218 $ 201,300 ww$32,868,600 102 $366,886 Village of Round Lake Hei hts 6 $9 751 $ 1.323,500 8 $ 63,899 Villaqe of Round Lake Park 17 $9,991 $ 4,024,900 3 $ 11,642 Village of Third Lake 4 $3 849 $ 1,090,000 0 $ Village of Tower Lakes _ WYmmIT 5IT ITIT $7.507 $ww1,305,000 1 _ mmmmm $ Villa a of Vernon Hills 24 _ $10 135 $ 4,360,900 Me m�2 -$ 245 . Village of Volo _ - 1ITIT $1,440 $500,000 0 $ _. ........ 2 $ 1,986,400m ._. 3. $ 3,699 village of Wadsworth 8 $7,41mmmITIT Village of Wauconda ... 36 $34,052 $ 7,705,600 2gm $156,816pp Risk Assessment 3-20 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-14 Lake County Flood Insurance Active Policies and Claims -continued IT Number of Total Total Number r of Premium Coverage Claims* Total Paid Communit .. ... Active Policies ____.. ITIT City of Waukegan 77 $83 218 $17,610,200 30 $407 890 g„mm �.._...... 813 $ 921,455 $ 1 72,221,300 i $709,809 Villa a of Wheelin WunmmmIT _wmmm� 135 _mm _Villa __...19 $ 2,596,000 ..... 4 _$ ..21,534 Village of Winthro Harbor 10 g $4,219 mm __City of Zion .. 9 �ITITIT$10,253. $ 1,851,600 11 $ 36,699 _ ....._. _ Unincor orated La ke County 964� $ 901,931 $ 197,120,500 405 1 $ 2,210,926......... 0,280 $ 909 1694 $10,010,554 TOTALS....... 4,051 $4,08ITITITIT 544700....... ....-.-.......me, _....... *Since 1978 3.3.3 Repetitive Flood Loss Properties FEMA defines a"repetitive loss structure" as a flood-insured structure that has received two or more flood insurance claim payments of more than 25% of the market value within any 10-year period. Lake County currently has 86 repetitive loss structures on the FEMA list. Of the 86 properties, 18 have been mitigated(acquired, elevated or otherwise protected). The remaining 68 properties are located in 14 municipalities and unincorporated Lake County, as presented in Table 3-15. Table 3-15 Lake County Repetitive Loss Structures Number of Number of Repetitive Loss Repetitive Loss Remaining Properties as of Properties as of Repetitive * Mitigated Mitigation Status Losses ' 4 3I3112011 .. .......mmITIT Community 6I301200mmITITIT Village of Beach Park 0 2 0 2 Village of Fox Lake 10 18__.....mmmmmmIT 0 WmITITIT 18 .............. _ ...... Village of Gurnee 3 6 3 1-2009 FMA Pending, 3 1-HMGP School I City of Highland �.... ......_...._. ......... _...... .........�... .... _� Park 5 6 0 _ 6 ................ ......... .-..... City of Lake Forest 4 3 1 2 ._ ......... .............. ...... Village of Libertyville 1 2 1 1 Village of Lincolnshire 1 1 0 1 Village of Lindenhurst 2 2� � 1 1 -2011 PDM Pending - - � � 1 Village of Riverwoods 1 1 0 1 Village of Round Lake 1 1 0 1 Village of Round Lake Beach 2 5 -mmmmmIT 1 1 -200 9... 4 g mmmmITITITITIT 9 FMA Pending 4 Village of Round Lake Heights __. _. ......... _..... ghts 1 1 1 1 -2008 PDM 0 . ...... . _.. ..... Village of Wauconda 1 1 0 1 _.. ............ _........._. City of Waukegan 1 1 0 1 Co unty oup..... Lake Co WWmmty(Unincorporated 24 36 10 ( -Severe Rep.Loss 26 SRL ........... Totals: .5 .... 7 18 68 The repetitive flood loss structures located throughout the county,but are more concentrated in the Fox River Watershed. They are nearly all single family residences. Two repetitive loss properties are commercial properties. Risk Assessment 3-21 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The repetitive loss properties were examined by community and watershed and new repetitive flood loss areas were identified for this ANHMP (from those identified in the 2004 Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan). The repetitive loss areas are shown in Exhibit 3-4. Repetitive flood loss areas include 1 or more repetitive loss properties and the neighboring or nearby properties subject to similar flood damage. The repetitive loss areas numbers and names are shown in Table 3-16. The naming convention used for the repetitive flood loss areas are the [Community Name— Subwatershed(or Lake)Name]. Each repetitive loss area has additional properties within the area. Neighboring or nearby properties with similar flood problems are will included in the area. Table 3-16 includes all 86 properties shown on the FEMA list (18 mitigated properties and 68 not mitigation properties). Table 3-16 Lake County Repetitive Flood Loss Area Numbers and Names ber Number Rep. of Rep. Rep. of Rep. Loss Loss Loss Loss Area Properties Area Properties Number Rep.Loss Area Name in Area Number Rep. Loss Area Name in Area _. _... Plaines 3 1... 1 Beach Park Dead River 2 22 County-Lower Desmmm 2 Fox Lake Pistakee Lake wITmmw 7 23 _ County-Lower Des Plaines 4 2 - mm 3 Fox Lake-Fox Lake 5 24 Lake Forest t-Skokie River „mmmmmITIT_„ 1 e- _25 , Forest Bluff/Ravine 1 4 Fox Lake ,Local _ 3 25 Lake Forestu_mmmITIT Duck Lake -m Libertyville es Plaines River 1 5 Fox Lake-Duck Lake .�._......4 26 Libert ville-De Plaines River 1 6 _ Gurnee-Des Plaines 6 27 Lincolnshire-Des P_ ww mmmmmmITIT� 7 - Hi hland Park-Middle Fork 1 28 Lindenhurst-Local 1 1 e.l 3 29 Lindenhurst-Local 2 1 8 _..Hip hland Park-Skokie River 1 mmmITmm .......� _.. ... 9 Hi hland Park-Skokie River 2 2 30 Riverwoods Local 1 10 Count -Fish Lake Drain 2 31 Round Lake Beach- 1 11 County-Lower Fox 4 32 Round Lake Beach- 2 12 Count -Upper Fox 1 _ 33 Round Lake Beach- 1 .—.. _.... ... 13 Count -Fox Lake 1 34 Round Lake Beach- 1 __...m 14 County Lake Hei hts- g 1 Petite Lake 1 35 Round La_.. Count -Squaw Creek 1 15mm -.,County-Lake Mane 8 36mm 16 County-Lake Catherine 1 1 r37 Wauconda-Slocum Lake17 County-Lake Catherine2 2 8Waukegan-Dead River18 County IT _ insSlocum Lake Drain 3 9 Count Upper Des Plaines 19 County-Local 1 2 40 Countym Pistakee Lake 1 _...... ..... Local 2 20 Count -Lower Des Plaines 1 3 41 Lake Forest _ITITm 21 County-Lower Des Plaines 2 1... 42 County-Flint Creek 1 Risk Assessment 3-22 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan AlU,14,Aiw �at�wwx a. µ .,.«'* " .....W.k"7....ma tl9Y 1 wiry � 141P �Y w v k'Iv"..I"x f r, 118 aWMI1PoWsA p 0 M r l V I f `II h 9 9 j iM1�s„ S y a t n rya J' ,y�"'"„�, v, t c tW n. I I� a �,aawr y:<mwm rc7 M y 4A4! %Fi 4k Y v.rt miy' F wd 'd^ gm grwt w,M 9 41 P Pt J �ti � A ,oTi90M ry 11":n � fl..b.4 �� I,� ��Wd mi�1:'rw�M,'k� � ••• Ili W. Yp tlilAii�I L ', .. f � flJtl P RAITR .mN � M ,a, as ru v t&9 r e^m' r r m ry :-. r' w.„ ✓w wvrmrrc ^p r MV'aLL V Ii ��, � a rvw.,"Fw.mP ri 7vw tt 4 m,+t✓;turrw�. o-�wnwwrmwrr rmm.�wo,wew � mo � ,� �mw.rve wx j �s eaw«mw rcn sAa4 k.ya dY.,a 'a kwo F�M r,.w a rwt� l' mm�umw i w,v«m« YxrPm n'wxwi« «-, n 'w✓�,9 Water-shed Boundan1 Lake County, Illinois pte Bounden/Open Watertipcn ter Rep Loss Areas .� .. Rivers and Strearns Lake ExpressvrayFlnterstate a,au,�a�a MichigancF!lghigHA at US Highvl'ra State Highway Major Road s �._. Rep ii.rcu�si.l @dtm�jv„ri Ina Exhibit 3-4 Lake County Repetitive Flood Loss Areas Risk Assessment 3-23 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Since 2000, Lake County has been conducting "flood audits" in repetitive loss areas. Table 3-17 shows the number of repetitive loss properties that have received a flood audit in each community. A number of the properties included in the 37 properties in Table 3-17 that are shown as "To Be Audited" are within areas that did have other flood audits conducted between 2000 and 2006. Mitigation of repetitive flood loss structures are discussed further in Chapter 5. Table 3-17 "Flood Audited" Repetitive Loss Properties in Lake County ....................... ........... Repetitive Loss Audited Repetitive Properties To Be CommunityLoss ss Properties Audited Village of Beach Park 0 2 Village of Fox Lake 7 11 Village of Gurnee 1 2 .. ... _ _..... City of.Hl ............... Highland Park 3 3 City _ .... _......... of Lake Forest 2 0 . .. .... Village of Libertyville 0 1 Village of Lincolnshire _.. ns .. ..._,�., g hire 1 0 ...................... ........ Village of Lindenhurst 1 0 ... ......... Village of Riverwoods 1 0 Village of Round Lake 1 0 ... .._..... . Village of Round Lake Beach 1 3 _ ........... Village of Round Lake Heights -- -- ..... ........V _.. illage of Wauconda 0 1 City of Waukegan 1 0 ........._........ _.. Lake County(Unincorporated Areas) 12 14 ........... . ......a.- _ ........_...... Su btotals: 31 37 Total Properties=68 3.3.4 Past Floods and Future Flood Frequency The National Climate Data Center(NCDC), maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, records weather events as they are submitted for record. The NCDC has a record of the flooding in Lake County from 1996 to 2010, which are shown in Table 3-18. Other small floods most likely occurred that did not get recorded. The NCDC data recorded no injuries or deaths with these events. The May 2004 event attracted national attention and was destructive on a wide scale. River flooding was recorded across Lake County and portions of Cook and Lake Counties, as well as local flash flooding from individual storms that occurred during this month. The river flooding, mainly on the Des Plaines River, had some of its origin in southern Wisconsin,but affected the river channel through Lake County and into Cook County. Monthly rainfall totals peaked over 10 inches across Lake and Lake Counties, while 6 inches or more were common further south including northwest Indiana. Risk Assessment 3-24 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-18 Past Occurring Flood Events In Lake County, National Climatic Data Center(NCDC) Location Date Type Property Channel Lake5/13/2010 Flash $500,000 F.....� Damage lood Knollwood 5/13/2010 Flash Flood $0 ...... ....... Leithton 6/19/2009 Flood $0 Gurnee 6/19/2009 Flash Flood$0 Russell 8/23/2007 Flood ....�. $100,000 ke Bluff 8/7/2007 Flash Flood $10,000 Lake Bluff 7/18/2007 Flood ...... $ Zion 6/8/2007 ......� Flash FloodWW mmmIT $0.. Knollwoodmmmmm 3/21/200 7 Flash Flood $50,000 Libertyville 3/21/2007 Flood $0 Lake Bluff 7/27/2006 Flood .... $0 Libertyville ..... ..._.. 7/27/2006Wuu __Flood $OW Lake Villa ... 5/30/2006 Flood $0 .......... .........� __ ... Hawthorne Woods 5/30/2006 Flood $0 Countywide 2/14/2005 Flood mmmmmmITITITIT�F $0 Countywide 6/11/2004 FloodmmmmmmIT __,....a. $0 Gurnee 5/30/2004 Flash Flood $0 .._........... . ....... _...... Countywide 5/22/2004 Flood $0 Mundelein 5/18/2004 Flash Flood $0 _...... ............. Countywide 8/22/2002 Flood $0 Countywide 8/22/2002Flash Flood $0 ..... _. .. ._ _. ..._. Countywide 6/4/2002 Flood $0 .............. __ .... Countywide 10/23/2001 Urban Flood $0 ......... Lake Forest _. 10/13/2001 Flash Flood $180,000 ........ ........_.. ............ .........._..... Countywide 6/12/2000 Flood $0 SoutheFlash rn 5/20/1996 Flood $0 Southeast 5/16/1996 Flash Flood $0 ......... Total _...... 1841,000 Throughout Lake County, overbank flooding is most extensive along the Des Plaines River with the highest historical floods occurring in 1938, 1960, 1979, 1986 and 2004. 1986 Flood: Northeastern Illinois received almost one inch of rain daily from September 21 through October 4. On some days, there was as much as three inches. Over this two-week period, the Des Plaines watershed received up to 12.9 inches of rain compared to the normal monthly amount of 3 inches. The flooding in Lake County killed four people. One person drowned when his boat capsized and three people had heart attacks fighting the flood. On September 25, the river was two feet over flood stage and high enough to reach buildings. This flooding along with flooding in the Fox River/Chain of Lakes watershed resulted in a disaster declaration by the President on October 7 for Cook, Lake, Kane, and Lake Counties. Risk Assessment 3-25 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The worst flooding in Lake County was in the Village of Gurnee, where approximately 100 buildings were flooded. Based on the flood insurance claims, they suffered an average of $10,000 in damage. Most severely affected were the public properties. Gurnee Grade School suffered structural damage when the northern half settled, cracking the walls and the roof. The Viking Junior High School was flooded. The police station basement floor buckled from hydrostatic pressure. The fire station was not damaged, but it was surrounded by flood water and due to the closing of the Grand Avenue Bridge over the Des Plaines River part of the equipment had to be moved to the other side of the River. The Village government estimated its cost for flood fighting and reconstruction to � ,� be over$200,000. Damage to the Gurnee Grade School, the Viking Junior High School and the school district offices were estimated at r $1.2 million. Damage to Park District property was estimated at $43,000. For additional historical and flooding information reference the draft Gurnee Flood Mitigation Plan at the Village of Gurnee. The average annual damage in Lake County for the flood was $9.2 million. Reported flood events over the past 25 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing a flood event can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 28 flood events since 1986, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every 1.12 years from 1986 through 2011. [(Current Year) 2011] subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1986] = 25 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 25] divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 28] = 1.12 Furthermore, the historic frequency calculates that there is an 89% chance of this type of event occurring each year. 3.3.5 Vulnerability - Impacts of Flooding Lake County's population is expected to continue to grow and for development to continue. Lake County is currently susceptible to flooding and it should be anticipated that flood risk will continue to grow. Lake County is doing a number of activities to abate this potential increase in flood risk, including the implementation of the Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance Risk Assessment 3-26 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan and comprehensive planning to protect against new flood damages (these efforts are summarized in Chapter 4). However, Lake County is part of two large watersheds and cannot regulate development in Wisconsin. Life, health and safety,buildings, critical facilities, infrastructure and the economy are all affected by flooding in Lake County Health and safety: Safety during a flood, whether from overbank flooding or groundwater flooding (basements), is a concern. If clean-up after a flood is not properly done, then health problems can develop due to mold. Flooding roads and viaducts are dangerous. People continue to be at risk when driving through floodwaters; fast moving waters are a hazard to people in and out of cars. The highest flood depths are at the Fox River, but stormwater flooding away from the floodplain in Lake County can also threaten lives, as emphasized in the death during the 1982 flood event. Impact to health and safety due to flooding is considered moderate. Damage to Buildings: The Lake County estimate of structures located in the floodplain and floodway is shown in Table 3-19. These numbers were used in the 2006 ANHMP and are based on current FEMA maps. These numbers will be updated when new FEMA maps are published for Lake County(expected in early 2012) Table 3-19 Structures Located in Lake County Floodplains Number of Number of Watershed Structures in Structures in Floodplain Floodway Fox River 6,420 219 ........_. ........... _ ..._.... ....... Des Plaines River 2,547 695 ................. .............................. ......... North Branch Chicago River 1,332 431 Lake Michigan 604 103 .m._......a..... Total: 10,903 1... _.. ,448 _....... ___ ........._. *Source: SMC GIS Among the 10,903 structures located in the floodplain at least 60 of the 68 FEMA repetitive flood properties in Lake County have not been mitigated. The value of these structures is estimated in Table 3-20, Table 3-20 Estimated Market Value of Structures Located in Lake County Floodplains Land Use Estimated Market.._.... . t Value Resident.... ...... _.... ial $1,072 million ................._ ..._..... . . Commercial $494 million Industrial $137 million Agric ........... __................ ural $6 million _�................._. Total Estma"..... _......._...�. �.... ted Value: $1,709 million Risk Assessment 3-27 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The range of flood damage to buildings is likely to be 5%to 50%, or a range $85 million to $850 million. Impact to buildings due to flooding is considered high. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure: SMC data shows approximately 20 critical facilities that could be closed or subject to flooding. As the County's GIS is expanded, a more accurate count of critical facilities in the floodplain will be developed. Impact to critical facilities due to flooding is considered moderate. Economic Impact: Flood damage to businesses is difficult to estimate. Businesses that are disrupted by floods often have to be closed. They lose their inventories, customers cannot reach them, and employees are often busy protecting or cleaning up their flooded homes. Business can be disrupted regardless of the business being located in the floodplain when customers and clients cannot reach their location. As with flooded roads,public expenditures on flood fighting, sandbags, fire department calls, clean-up and repairs to damaged public property affect all residents of the County, not just those in the floodplain. Therefore, overall economic impact to businesses is high. Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: From data presented in Section 3.2.2, most of Lake County is vulnerable to flooding. The Village of Indian Creek does not have mapped floodplain but may be subject to local flooding problems. The communities of Lake Bluff, Highwood, Highland Park,North Chicago and Winthrop Harbor are subject to coastal flooding from Lake Michigan. 3.4 Tornado Wind can be defined as the motion of air relative to the earth's surface. The horizontal component of the three-dimensional flow and the near-surface wind phenomenon are the most significant aspects of the hazard. Extreme windstorm events are associated with extratropical and tropical cyclones, winter cyclones, and severe thunderstorms and accompanying mesoscale offspring such as tornadoes and downbursts. Winds vary from zero at ground level to 200-mph in the upper atmospheric jet stream at 6 to 8 miles above the earth's surface. The damaging effects of windstorms associated with hurricanes may extend for distances in excess of 100 miles from the center of storm activity. For coastal areas from Texas to Maine, tropical cyclone winds may exceed 100 mph. Severe thunderstorms can produce wind downbursts and microbursts, as well as tornadoes. Severe windstorms result in as many as 1,000 tornadoes annually. A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel-shaped cloud extending to the ground. Tornadoes are most often generated by thunderstorm activity(but sometimes result from hurricanes or tropical storms)when cool, dry air intersects and overrides a layer of warm, moist air forcing the warm air to rise rapidly. The damage caused by a tornado is a result of high wind velocities and wind-blown debris. According to the National Weather Service, tornado wind speeds can range between 30 to more than 300 miles per hour. They are more likely to occur during the spring and early summer months of March through June and are most likely to Risk Assessment 3-28 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan form in the late afternoon and early evening. Most tornadoes are a few dozen yards wide and touchdown briefly, but even small, short-lived tornadoes can inflict tremendous damage. Destruction ranges from minor to catastrophic depending on the intensity, size, and duration of the storm. Structures made of light materials such as mobile homes are most susceptible to damage. Each year, an average of over 800 tornadoes is reported nationwide, resulting in an average of 80 deaths and 1,500 injuries (NOAA, 2002). The Enhanced Fujita Scale, also known as the "EF-Scale,"measures tornado strength and associated damages. The EF-Scale, shown in Table 3-21, is an update to the earlier Fujita scale that was published in 1971. It classifies United States tornadoes into six intensity categories based upon the estimated maximum winds occurring within the wind vortex. The EF-Scale has become the definitive metric for estimating wind speeds within tornadoes based upon the damage done to buildings and structures since it was implemented through the National Weather Service in 2007. Table 3-21 Enhanced Fujita Scale and Associated Damage .�................ Wind Speed EFScale Number (MPH) Type of Damage Possible ...... Minor damage:Peels surface off some roofs;some damage to gutters or siding; EFO 65-85 branches broken off trees;shallow-rooted trees pushed over.Confirmed tornadoes with no reported damage(i.e.,those that remain in open fields)are always rated EFO. ............. .. ........ ... EF1 86-110 Moderate damage:Roofs severely stripped;mobile homes overturned or badly damaged;loss of exterior doors;windows and other glass broken. Considerable damage:Roofs tom off well-constructed -�g d houses;foundations of frame EF2 111-135 homes shifted;mobile homes completely destroyed;large trees snapped or uprooted; light-object missiles generated;cars lifted off ground. � __.......�--- ............... Severe damage:Entire stories of well-constructed houses destroyed;severe damage to EF3 136-165 large buildings such as shopping malls;trains overturned;trees debarked;heavy cars lifted off the ground and thrown;structures with weak foundations blown away some distance. _. .. evst hting thrown and small missiles � nmmmmmmm _............ ........ EF4 166-200 Devastating g Well-constructed houses and whole frame houses completely a ssiles generated. Extreme damage:Strong frame houses leveled off foundations and swept ... g g pt away; EF5 >200 automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 m(300 ft);steel reinforced concrete structure badly damaged;high-rise buildings have significant structural deformation. The Storm Prediction Center has developed damage indicators to be used with the Enhanced Fujita Scale for different types of buildings but can be also be used to classify any high wind event. Some of the indicators for different building types are shown in Table 3-22 through Table 3-25 below. Risk Assessment 3-29 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-22 Institutional Buildings ................ _ ...... ............. ....... Damage Description Wind Speed Range(Expected In Threshold of visible dam age 59-88 MPH(72 MPH) Loss of roof covering(<20/0 72-109 MPH 8 g( � ) ( 6 MPH) ................ _...................� Damage to penthouse roof&walls,loss of rooftop 75-111 MPH(92 MPH) HVAC equipment Broken lass in windows or doors 78-115 MPH 95 MPH Uplift of lightweight - p g ht roof deck&insulation, 95-136 MPH(114 MPH) significant loss of roofing material(>20%) Fagade components torn from structure 97-140 MPH(1 ........... ..... 18 MPH) Dama a to curtain walls or other wall cladding . ............ �. g g 1 10-152 MPH(131 MPH) Uplift of pre-cast concrete ._.... oncrete roof slabs WWmmmmmITITIT �919-163 MPH(142 MPH) UpliftWof e fill .. .... m et-al deck with concrete .. slab 118-170 MPH(146 MPH) Collapse m of soe top building envelope 127-172 MPH(148 MPH) SignifimmmmITITnt damage to building envelope ca 178- 6 ......... ...� 268 MPH(210 MPH) Source:Storm Prediction Center,2009 Table 3-23 Educational Institutions (Elementary Schools, High Schools) Damage Description Wind Speed Range(Expected In Parentheses) .................. ..... ........... Threshold of visible damage 55-83 MPH(68 MPH) .............. Loss of roof covering(<20%) 66-99 MPH(79 MPH) ........ ...... ........ ......... Broken windows 71-106 MPH(87 MPH) ........_. Exterior door failures 83-121 MPH(101 MPH) Uplift of metal roof decking;significant los.... 5" .... 'g ' s of roofing material 85-119 MPH(101 MPH) (>20%);loss of rooftop HVAC Damage to or loss of wall cladding 92-127 MPH(108 MPH) .... MPH Collapse of tall masonry walls at gym,cafeteria,or auditorium 94-136 -....H 1 �ITITIT-ITIT�(114 MPH) ...... ..... ... _ ..... .... Uplift or collapse of light steel roof structure 108-148 MPH(125 MPH) Collapse of exterior walls in top floor 121-153 MPH(139 MPH) Most interior walls of top floor collapsed 13.. mmmmmmITITIT 3-186 MPH(158 MPH) Total destruction of a large section of building envelope _ 163-224 MPH . (192 MPH) .. .... ................ Source:Stonn Prediction Center,2009 Risk Assessment 3-30 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-24 Metal Building Systems Damage Description Wind Speed Range(Expected In Parentheses) �............ .,.. .._ ........._� .............. Threshold of visible damage 54-83 MPH(67 MPH) Inward or outward collapsed of overhead doors p 75-108 MPH(89 MPH) Metal roof or wall panels pulled from the building 78-120 MPH(95 MPH) ...... ..... _. Column anchorage failed 96-135 MPH(117 MPH) Buckling of roof purlins 95-138 MPH(118 MP H) Failure of X-braces in the lateral load resisting system 118-158 MPH(138 MPH) ...... --- .._....... Progressive collapse of rigid frames 120-168 MPH(143 MPH) Total destruction of building ... 132-178 WM ................ PH(155 MPH) Source:Storm Prediction Cent � _...._... nter,2009 Table 3-25 Electric Transmission Lines Damage Description Wind Speed Range(Expected In 7 Parentheses) ..._............ ..................... Threshold of visible damage 70-98 MPH(83 MPH) _.. Broken wood cross member 80-114 MPH(99 MPH) Wood poles leaning ,_, 85-130 MPH(108 MPH) .Broken wood poles _.. 98_1.4 .................. _.... .............. 2 MPH(118 MPH) ......... ........ ... ............ Broken or bent steel or concrete poles 115-149 MPH(138 MPH) Collapsed metal truss towers 116-165 MPH(141 MPH) ..... ._........ ........ ......_._ .......... .... Source:Storm Pr &horn Center„2009 Strong winds can also occur outside of tornadoes, severe thunderstorms, and winter storms. These winds typically develop with strong pressure gradients and gusty frontal passages. The closer and stronger two systems (one high pressure, one low pressure) are, the stronger the pressure gradient, and therefore, the stronger the winds are. Downburst winds, which can cause more widespread damage than a tornado, occur when air is carried into a storm's updraft, cools rapidly, and comes rushing to the ground. Cold air is denser than warm air, and therefore, wants to fall to the surface. On warm summer days, when the cold air can no longer be supported up by the storm's updraft, or an exceptional downdraft develops, the air crashes to the ground in the form of strong winds. These winds are forced horizontally when they reach the ground and can cause significant damage. These types of strong winds can also be referred to as straight-line winds. Downbursts with a diameter of less than 2.5 miles are called microbursts and those with a diameter of 2.5 miles or greater are called macrobursts. A derecho, or bow echo, is a series of downbursts associated with a line of thunderstorms. This type of phenomenon can extend for hundreds of miles and contain wind speeds in excess of 100 mph. Risk Assessment 3-31 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.4.1 Tornado Hazard Profile Next to flooding and winter storms, tornadoes are the most prevalent natural hazard in Lake County. The southeast half of Lake County is in a belt of high tornado frequency. Warnings for Lake County come from the National Weather Service office in Romeoville, IL. Peak tornado occurrences are in March through May as past records further indicate in Table 3-26. According to the University of South Carolina's Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute (SHELDUS) as well as the National Climatic Data Center, Lake County has been impacted by 16 tornado events since 1957. Tornado touchdown locations are shown in Exhibit 3-5. Past Occurrences: In April 1965 a tornado caused considerable property damage estimated around $500,000 in the western part of Gurnee. A tornado that struck Zion on April 19, 1996, caused enough damage to result in a federal disaster declaration for the county. Two people were injured and damage was estimated at $ 6.6 million. It was rated an F2 with a path between Lindenhurst and Gurnee in Lake County. On May 18, 1997, Gurnee had another F2 touch down. No damage or injuries were reported. Adequate prediction methods have not been developed for tornadoes, so a good warning Tornado Frequency system is the only defense. The most devastating was the March 28, 1920, F3 tornado that killed 8 ` people and injured 100. This tornado went AVERAGE „ through 3 counties, Kane, Cook, and Lake. It '��; followed a path from southeast of LaFox to the south side of Elgin to Wauconda. A second notable event occurred on April 11, 1965, when ,�- ° x[Gx �' Lake and McHenry Counties were struck by an Low ' F4 tornado. The tornado killed 6 and "r people injured 75. The tornado began in Crystal Lake and went on an 11-mile path that was as wide as . 400 yards. Damage was estimated at $1.5 " w� million. e Other notable tornado events occurred on April ;. 21, 1967, when an F4 killed one person and Gam' injured 100, the tornado struck Fox River Grove, M" Barrington Hills, and Lake Zurich, producing a damage path nine miles long. Lake Zurich was hardest hit with 140 homes destroyed and 463 Source: Illinois Emergency Management Agency damaged, and damage was estimated at $10 million(USA Today Weather, January 6, 1999). On September 28, 1972, an F4 tornado injured 20 people in Lake County, the tornado followed a 5-mile path and damage was estimated at $1 million. According to local historians on June 3, 1860, a destructive tornado swept the southern end of Lake County. Risk Assessment 3-32 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 19APR1996 �Qufl , 2032 HRS �ry m Aua F2 20 0225 41F w APR'1976 ........._. _ -r 45 HRS 20JUN197 F1 �1 F2 — 1825 HRS 18APR2002 09OCT1y58 FO 1843 HRS 0055 VIRS f' �p FO F2 I IIIIII �'�� ' 11APR1905 1550 HRS 11APRt965 t 1804 HRS ISMAN1997 F2 pp �«r 181ti HR r � G F2 'r°4 1 w g ey r➢� r 4 rvut+wnrr'.w H� O:z15 HRS ® nat Wh J/AA M1 SJUI.1986 1f345 FIRS s ry � F0 rrra� �� i N17 feu F1 HRS 9810 HRS 11,.�... i ;:.. .. ww,5�e 000 xv nrcwka uv :�i :S � „o�^ter ^, F1 1 Hf 1/55 HR.S �w q. � xw V^ 0 �1 ✓nm � � � h .qy 'f� r 11APR1965 1535 I-IRS w F4 �� b 'Hh h, rh m'n4n IH p t „, + h i 1 nr wPr rwo' rvrW�:".m.Wuwl p iu'.em uwt.rrWmn 6 11 P HR6F u <ry �� Aore,rvR �ry "t�,.,"rS F� rd" Ap Y re wmm.xw,.uarma4 *m awnnrea.xcrrrwrvi,�ran �,w,�nTmw: wrx•,�rvr�m Lake County, Illinois Tornado Touch Downs Lake Michigan Exhibit 3-5 Lake County Tornado Touch Downs Risk Assessment 3-33 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-26 Lake County Tornado History(1957-2011) (NCDC) Location Date Magnitude Death Injuries Property Crop Damage Damage Co'u"Wtywide 3/14/1957 F1 0 0 $3000 $0 Countywide......... - . 10/9/1958 F2....., ._ ...... ...� 0 0 $2,500,000 $0 Count......ide 4/11/1..9...... _ .. ...0 ............. yw 65 F4 0 0 Countywide 4/11/1965 F2 0 0 $250,000 $0 __ ..... Countywide 4/11/1965 F1 0 0 $250,000 $0 Countywide 4/21/1967 F4 1 97 $2,500,000 $0 Countywide ide 9/28/1972 F4 0.....� .....��_.� 20 $2,500,000 $0 Countywide 6/20/1974 FO _ 0 0...... OK ._. $0 Countywide 11/10/1975 F .......... $� -�1 0 0 $25,000 .... __ ....._. _.. _____._...... _....a._. Countywide 4/20/1976 F2 0 2 $25,000 $0 Countywide.... 8/9/1979 _........ .. _ _ ......._.� 0 0 $25,000 $0 ........_ ...... _... Countywide 7/6/1986 FO 0 0 $0 $0 _. ......— — C _ ountywide 6/29/1990 F1 0 0 $25,000 $0 Zion 4/19/1996 F2 0 2 $6,600,000 $0 Lindenhurst 5/18/1997 F2 0 0 $0 $0 Zion 4/18/2002 FO 0 0 $0 $0 _. Totals: _121 __ _. __..... .. 1 1 00.4,703 O. $0 ...._.. .............. ........ . There have been significant tornadoes in the Chicago metropolitan area. The deadliest tornado occurred on April 21, 1967, during an outbreak of 5 significant tornadoes. One tornado formed in Palos Hills in Cook County and traveled through Oak Lawn and the south side of Chicago. Thirty-three people died and 500 people were injured by this 200-yard wide tornado that traveled 16 miles and caused over $50 million in damage. A second tornado in this weather system ripped through the southwest portion of Lake County destroying around 50 homes, damaging over 200 others, and demolishing the Seth Paine Elementary School. The funnel began above the Police Headquarters of the Village of Barrington Hills at around 4:50 p.m. At 5:05 p.m. it struck Seth Paine at Miller Road and Route 22. It continued on to the Acorn Acres Estates and severely damaged the Old Zeman Brewery on Gilmer Road east of Route 63. The only F5 tornado in the Chicago metropolitan area was on August 28, 1990. This tornado formed near Oswego and passed through Plainfield and Joliet (a 16 mile path). The tornado killed 29, injured 350, and caused $165 million in damage. Additional information was provided by the Village of Antioch regarding the April 19, 1996 Zion tornado. The wind damage that occurred in Antioch and along Highway 173 from Harvard to Zion(with the wind storm finally called a tornado in Zion) resulted in major damage throughout the Village of Antioch and Antioch Township. Several roofs were ripped off buildings, numerous trees went down, at least one house had the entire side of it removed, and numerous other damage occurred as a result of this tornado. Risk Assessment 3-34 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Future Probability: With 16 occurrences over a 54 years period, the likelihood of a tornado hitting somewhere in the county is 0.296 (30%) in any given year, and from 1957 to 2011 a tornado has occurred once every 3.3 years. [(Current Year) 2011] subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1957] = 54 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 54] divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 16] = 3.375 Assuming a tornado affects one square mile and there are 470.55 square miles in Lake County, the odds of a tornado hitting any particular square mile in the County is 1 in 1,590 tornadoes each year or a 0.0006% chance. FEMA notes that approximately 1,000 tornadoes occur each year in the United States. Illinois is ranked number 8 in the United States in terms of tornadoes and 6 in terms of number of killer tornadoes between January 1, 1950 and September 30, 2003. Tornadoes are most likely to occur between March and June, but a tornado can occur at any time. Over half of the tornadoes hit between 3:00 and 7:00 PM. Therefore, the probability of a tornado occurring in Illinois is high. 3.4.2 Vulnerability— Tornado Impact All of Lake County is vulnerable to tornadoes. Past tornadoes have been deadly and have led to disaster declarations in Lake County. The potential for loss of life and significant property damage in growing in Lake County as the population and number of buildings increases. All assets located in Lake County can be considered at risk from tornadoes and wind events. This includes 703,462 people, or 100% of the County's population and all critical facilities, structures, and infrastructure. Health and Safety: Vulnerability to residents and buildings is as the county grows in population and building counts. Fifteen deaths and over 200 injuries have been attributed to tornadoes in Lake County. On average, Illinois experiences 4 tornado—related deaths each year. Based on tornado history in Illinois, advanced warning and taking appropriate shelter appears to be the best mitigation method for preventing death and injury. Based on national statistics for 1970-1980, for every person killed by a tornado, 25 people were injured and 1,000 people received some sort of emergency care. Residents living in mobile homes are more vulnerable than people in permanent homes. People can inadvertently put their lives in danger during a tornado, or have little or no warning. Impact to health and safety for severe winter storms is considered high. Damage to Buildings: Structures within the direct path of a tornado vortex are often reduced to rubble. However, structures adjacent to the tornadoes path are often severely damaged by high winds flowing into the tornado vortex, known as inflow winds, or by debris. The buildings adjacent to the tornado path can be significantly impacted depending on the design and materials used in the building construction. Although tornadoes strike at random, making all buildings vulnerable, three types of structures are more likely to suffer damage: Mobile homes Risk Assessment 3-35 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan • Homes on crawlspaces (more susceptible to lift) • Buildings with large spans, such as airplane hangars, gymnasiums and factories To assess this potential for building damage, several tornado scenarios have been developed and presented below. Based on an analysis conducted by the State of Illinois for 2010 Illinois Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, Lake County has a median value of$198,200. The scenarios assume a tornado damage area of 5 square miles. 1. Average Lake County building density: 5 mi2 x 581 houses/mil = 2,905 homes damaged 2,905 homes x $228,600 per home x 50% of value damaged= $419 million 2. Rural area average building density: 5 mi2 x 80 houses/mi2 = 400 homes damaged 400 homes x $228,600 per home x 50% of value damaged= $58 million 3. Urban area (Waukegan) average building density: 5 mi2 x 1,208 houses/mi2= 6,040 homes damaged 6,040 homes x $228,600 per home x 50% of value damaged= $872 million For a 5 square mile area the County's average exposure to tornado damage ranges from $50 to $60 million. Impact to buildings due to tornadoes is considered high. Damage to Critical Facilities: Because a tornado can hit anywhere in the County, all categories of critical facilities are susceptible to being hit. Schools are a particular concern due to their large numbers of people present, either during school or as a storm shelter, and due to having large span areas, such as gyms and theaters. Impact to critical facilities for tornadoes is moderate, since facilities are spread throughout the county. Economic Impact: The major impact of a tornado on the local economy is damage to businesses and infrastructure. A heavily damaged business, especially one that was barely making a profit, often has to be closed. Infrastructure damage is usually limited to above ground utilities, such as power lines. Damage to roads and railroads is also localized. If it can't be repaired promptly, alternate transportation routes are usually available. Public expenditures include search and rescue, shelters, and emergency protection measures. The large expenses are for repairs to public facilities and clean- up and disposal of debris. Most public facilities are insured, so the economic impact on the local funds may be moderate. Economic impact due to tornadoes is considered moderate. Risk Assessment 3-36 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: Each municipality in the County has an equal susceptibility to high winds from tornadic activity. The deteriorating condition of older homes and the use of aluminum-clad mobile homes continue to remain highly susceptible to wind events. 3.5 Severe Summer Storms Dangerous and damaging aspects of severe storms are tornadoes, hail, lightning strikes, flash flooding, and winds associated with downbursts and microbursts. Thunderstorms, associated with strong winds, heavy precipitation, and lightning strikes can all be hazardous under the right conditions and locations. Strong winds and tornadoes can take down trees, damage structures, tip high Waukegan,July 11,2011 profile vehicles, and create high velocity Source: Chicago Tribune flying debris. Large hail can damage crops, dent vehicles,break windows, and injure or kill livestock, pets, and people. Severe storm weather conditions can exist during any season in Lake County,but they are referred to as severe summer storms to distinguish them from the severe winter storms addressed in this ANHMP. Thunderstorms affect relatively small areas when compared with hurricanes and winter storms. Despite their small size, all thunderstorms are dangerous. The typical thunderstorm is 15 miles in diameter and lasts an average of 30 minutes. Of the estimated 100,000 thunderstorms that occur each year in the United States, about 10 percent are classified as severe. The National Weather Service considers a thunderstorm severe if it produces hail at least 3/4 inch in diameter, winds of 58 MPH or stronger, or a tornado. Every thunderstorm needs three basic components: (1)moisture to form clouds and rain(2)unstable air which is warm air that rises rapidly and (3) lift, which is a cold or warm front capable of lifting air to help form thunderstorms. Lightning, although not considered severe by the National Weather Service definition, can accompany heavy rain during thunderstorms. Lightning develops when ice particles in a cloud move around, colliding with other particles. These collisions cause a separation of electrical charges. Positively charged ice particles rise to the top of the cloud and negatively charged ones fall to the middle and lower sections of the cloud. The negative charges at the base of the cloud attract positive charges at the surface of the Earth. Invisible to the human eye, the negatively charged area of the cloud sends a charge called a stepped leader toward the ground. Once it gets close enough, a channel develops between the cloud and the ground. Lightning is the electrical transfer through this channel. The channel rapidly heats to 50,000 degrees Fahrenheit and contains approximately 100 million electrical volts. The rapid expansion of the heated air causes thunder. Hail develops when a super cooled droplet collects a layer of ice and continues to grow, sustained by the updraft. Once the hail stone cannot be held up any longer by the updraft, it falls Risk Assessment 3-37 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan to the ground. Hail up to 2.75 inches in diameter, nearly the size of a baseball, was reported in Lake County in 1967, according to the NCDC. Nationally, hailstorms cause nearly$1 billion in property and crop damage annually, as peak activity coincides with peak agricultural seasons. Severe hailstorms also cause considerable damage to buildings and automobiles,but rarely result in loss of life. Seiche(s) develop as a result of air pressure and wind. When storm fronts move rapidly from across a large body of water such as Lake Michigan, air pressure changes and strong downbursts of wind can form one large wave or a series of large waves. The wave or waves will travel across the lake until the seiche reaches shore, where it can be reflected and travel to the opposite shore. The height of the waves depends on the strength of the wind and air pressure contrasts that form the seiche. 3.5.1 Severe Storm Hazard Profile Table 3-27: Hail Size Reference Lake County is subject to severe storms ranging from thunderstorms to hurricane related rain, such as with Hurricane Ike in common object Size In Diameter September 2008. Severe storms which have .... the potential to cause flash flooding, Pea 0.25 inch .......... tornadoes, downbursts, and debris. The severe Penny or Dime 0.75 inch storms profile in this section is primarily ............. concerned with damage from hail, high winds, Quarter - 1.00 inch lightning, and other storm affects such as � - .. _.. Half Dollar 1.25 inches seiches. .......�._ ........ ..— Golf Ball 1.75 inch.e.- s Reported severe weather events over the past 57 years provide an acceptable framework for Tennis Ban _... 2.50 inches determining the magnitude of such storms that Baseball _ 2.75 inches can be expected and planned for accordingly. FEMA places this region in Zone IV (250 Grapefruit 4.00 inches MPH) for structural wind design (FEMA, .... 2004. Large hail can damage structures, break windows, dent vehicles, ruin crops, and kill or injure people and livestock. Based on past occurrences,hail sizes greater than 3 inches in diameter are possible and should be accounted for in future planning activities. Non-tornadic, thunderstorm and non-thunderstorm winds over 100 mph should also be considered in future planning initiatives. These types of winds can remove roofs, move mobile homes, topple trees, take down utility lines, and destroy poorly-built or weak structures. There have been 93 recorded hail events associated with thunderstorms that have either directly or indirectly impacted Lake County since 1963. These events are listed in Table 3-28 and mapped in Exhibit 3-6. Risk Assessment 3-38 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-28 Lake County Hail Events (1963-2011) (NCDC) ........ Location Date Macgnitude Location Date Magnitude _....... LAKE 7/19/1963 2.00 in. Ingleside 7/17/2003 1.75 in. LAKE 4/14/1967 1.75 in. Round Lake 7/17/2003 1.2mmmmmm� 5 in. LAKE 7/18/1967 2.75 in. Wauconda 7/17/2003 1.00 in. LAKE 6/29/1969 2.00 in. Fox La ��....... _ ... i .Lake 7/17/2003 2 50 in. _...... _....... ......... LAKE 7/3/1975 1.75 in. Mundelein 7/17/2003 2.00 in. LAKE - .... 6/8/1977 1.75 in. Vernon Hills 7/17/2003 �0.75 in, LAKE 6/20/1979 0.75 in. Long Grove 7/20/2003 0.75 in. ...... ..... ..... _ .. ._ LAKE 8/5/1979 1.00 in. Wadsworth 8/1/2003 0.75 in. LAKE 6/5/1980 0.75 in. Long Grove 8/1/2003 0.75 in. LAKE 6/15/1985 1.00 in. Zion 3/1/2004 0.75 in, LAKE.._ -_......._. ..... .._ � .V. ......_. ......... � 5/11/1987 0.75 in, Vernon Hills 4/17/2004 0.75 in. LAKE 4/2....� _... ..._ ._...�... 5/1989 0.75 in, Grayslake 4/17/2004 0.75 in. LAKE 5/30/1.. --0.75 in. Ingleside 4/17/2004 0.75 in. ._.... ...... LAKE 6/30/1990 0.75 in. Lake Villa 4/17/2004 0.75 in. LAKE 5/5/1991 0 75 in. ..... �-� .... Waukegan 4/17/2004 0.75 in. .- _ LAKE 4/15/1992 1.75 in. Buffalo Grove 5/20/2004 0.75 in. Lake Zu.r... ._..... . ......_.. .... ..... ..� ich 8/23/1993 0.75 in. Round Lake 5/23/2004 0.75 in. g ......� ....... 0.88 in. Batavia 7/27/1995 -Waukegan 5/23/2004 0.75 in. Wauke an 4/12/1996 0.75 in. Bar nn ton 5/19/2005 0.7 Wauconda 5/12/1998 1.00 in. Gurnee 9/22/2005 1.00 in. Yv n.... ....�.-_..... .0� . Libertyville mmmmmmITIT- 5/12/1998 1.75 in. Lindenhurst 10/2/2005 0 75 m Zion _ 5/16/1999 1.00 in. Grayslake 4/13/2006 0.-75 in. Buffalo Grove mmmITITITIT 6/9/1999 1.50 in. Wauconda 4/13/2006 1..0_ ., u 00 in,. Winthrop Harbor 3/8/2000 0.75 in. � ..... .._.�.. � Mundelein 4/13/2006 0.75 in. Libertyville 5/18/2000 1.00 in. Hainesville 4/13/2006 0.75 in. Mundel in 5/18/2000� ...- ..� _....__.....�� e' 0.75 in. Gages Lake 4/13/2006 1.75 in. _.... .....�..L.. .......... _....� ..._....� �� North Ch icago 5/18/2000 1.00 in. Grayslake 4/13/2006 1.00 in. Halfday 5/18/2000 1.25 in.,, Waukegan 4/13/2006 1.75 in. n. Lake Zurich 5/18/2000 1.75 i Northth mmITIT Chicago 4/13/2006 1.00 in. Vernon Hills 5/18/2000 0.75 in, Wauconda 5/17/2006 1.00 in. Barrington Hills 5/18/2000 1.75 in. Wadsworth -_..... 7/9/2006 0.88 in. Lake Zurich 5/18/2000 1.75 in, Winthrop Harbor 8/24/2006 0.88 in. Libertyville 5/18/2000 0.75 in. Aptakisic 10/2/2006 0.75 5 in. Vernon Hills 5/18/2000 Lake 0.75 in. Zion 10/2/2006 0.88 in. _.. .. ..A__.._........ . - ..n Forest 5/18/2000 1.00 in, Aptakisic 10/2/2006 1 00 in. 0.75 in. Grayslake � 5/18/2000 mmmmmITIT� �..�. WWWWWWWWWWXIT�Lake Zurich 10/2/2006 1.00 in. Countywide 10/23/2001 2.00 in. Lake Zurich 10/2/2006 0.75 in, ..... Lake Villa m 4/18/2002 1.75 in. Forest Lake-� ��_ 3/21/2007 0.88 in. Forest Lake 3/21/2007 0. 4/30/2003 1.00 in. mm MundeleinmmmIT .... 88 in... North .......... Chicago 4/30/2003Libertyville- �. 0.75 in. 4/3/2007 0.88 in. Antioch 5/28/2003 1.00 in. I Round Lake 6/27/2007 0.75 in. Buffalo Grov e 7/6/2003. - 1.75 in. Deerfrfieldield .._........ _.... 8/4/2008 0.88 in. Deerfield._.a... Lake Zurich 5/1 7/6/2003 1.75 in. La _ ..... 3/2009 0.88 in; Lake Bluff. _ 7/6/2003.... .....�_........_ ............._.�..,, 1.75 in. Grass Lake 6/8/2009 1.00 in. Fox Lake 7/8/2003 1.00 in. Lake Zurich m6/19/2009 0.88 in. Antioch _.... 7/17/2003 1.00 in. Vernon Hills 3/20/2011 -0. 88 in. Fox Lake 7/17/2003 2 00 in. Risk Assessment 3-39 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan h w . w r � i �A w w f � k } I yy _, 4 " vau wrx iIt rrvam.me�:,mw,.m .,. mY'wm x v ' X, mm nxww Nw M / pr pAl 0 l g p ,. ,' �7 P .w.�n .✓' ry'N acr � ^G,xx:xu b 43 I I Nil a _ 'l „wY�q:w u„YmM1m.b- r 4' R dW+row'RasmY4 NVY„Atl" mm ... ;tl4 $J �S a yy fi� a t�smry h b ryry k�IkY ^"'""wrm'R -� :,."+4'aM a�',Nm^Y •w.:� ��M,'INi.,M'AmwWP q, � ,y.,y m, rTG Po A psi ,wmxs✓ ...., tl mmn *!4 i � t r � p U , Il..�.I� "✓»� & �rvnww N awMm�wrtip^Y�ry my A ..,� °�u µIVS�I,Ati'GWx nww.un'cs�'*n� .�rv'la• i,mk5@l rlq^R.^"Am. f Q 'hSxOA �. ................ Lake County, Illinois V mr"ws: p m. .7 Flail Events where hall over � I D.75,rin dia meter reported �, „�, . rrLake � Michigan as kTr .nYw.�..e.nd Wnmvnm wmorw+..ww.mim�+xm'+'.m u:-.�owmm �w✓v � ... Exhibit 3-6 Lake County Hail over 0.75" Risk Assessment 3-40 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Lake County has been fortunate in that no deaths or injuries have been reported as a result of hail. In addition, there has been no property or crop damage attributed to hail within the county. There have been 118 recorded severe wind events associated with thunderstorms that have either directly or indirectly impacted Lake County since 1960. The specifics of these events are shown in Table 3-29. Lake County, along with the rest of Illinois, is classified into Upper Midwest Wind Zone IV, as shown in Figure 3-4. Zone IV is classified by winds to potential to reach up to 250 mph. Table 3-29 High Wind Events In Lake County(1960-2011)With Recorded Deaths, In"uries Or IDarna a NCDC Location Date Magnitude Death Injuries Property Damage Round Lake Beach 7/27/1995 0 kts. 0 0 $2,000 Lindenhurst 8/28/1995 0 kts. 0 0 _$2,000 Fox LakeWWW m 4/19/1996 m _.0 kts. 0 2 - $5,000,000 ............... ..... .._ Fox Lake 7/21/1998 50 kts, 0 3 $0 Wauconda 5/17/1999 50 kts. 0 7 $0 Lake Villa 58 4/18/2002 kts, 0 0�- mm _... ..�.................. � ts $25,000 ........... _....... ........ _.. Fox Lake Hills 5/29/2006 50 kts, 0 0 $1,000 ...... ..... ._ ......_.. .� Mundelein 7/18/2006 50 kts. 0 0 $2,000 Lake Zurich 3/31/2007 56 kts, 0 0 $1,000 Gra slake 6/7/2007 55 kts. 0 0 $15,000 ........... Round Lake 6/7/2007 60 kts. 0 0 $50,000 Gurnee 6/7/2007 55 kts. 0 0 $5,000 Wauke an 6/7/2007 55 kts. 0 0 $3,000 Zion 8/7/2007 50 kts. 1 1 $0 Wauconda 8/12/2007 55 kts. 0 0 $10,000 Wauconda 8/22/2007 50 kts. 0 0 $3,000 Antioch Airport 5/31/2010 70 kts. 0 0 $5,000 Antioch 6/18/2010 65 kts. 0 0 $100,000 ....... Vernon Hills 6/18/2010 65 kts. 0 0 $20,000 Lindenhurst 10/26/2010 50 kts. 0 1 $10'000 TOTALS: 1 _ 24 $5,254'000 On April 19, 1996, a storm system moved into Northern Lake County around 11:00 PM. These storms downed power lines and trees at Fox Lake, Chain O'Lakes, and West of Antioch. Multiple buildings in the County were damaged, including homes and barns. Twenty-six homes in Wadsworth were damaged, as well as multiple planes at the Waukegan Regional Airport. This storm led to two injuries, including a 5-year old boy being taken to the hospital. The storm caused damages of$5,000,000 to properties. Reported high wind events strikes over the past 51 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipality experiencing a lightning strike associated with damages or injury can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 118 high wind events since 1960 that have either caused damages to buildings and infrastructure or resulted in an injury or death, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every .43 years from 1960 through 2011. Risk Assessment 3-41 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan .. .._ .w ............... .. .:............._._... ...-- ' Wind Zones in the 9 . Upper Midwest � ctl I nos ffi flOKS'V�O UN�tY E34YII.n ,Mies ��%✓i l // �///�r// /�i � f / � �� /. j� Uh��P'Pl.liffllY' Boundaries .r'�U:UV�": ��R 11�r�iU h'VU s1 MI(2N)�allpI7 V zono .............�. lair jai G arc j e"�. , nAA am rrra i i � /�%/�/��/�/l✓n lr i tlr✓� 4 511 �I rt f/i k (F � Diiiii/y ii �i �/M, i ✓� /i f ut i ,e f ,,,,,,,psi ,. "��„`„ �iV. // / / i( /r�/��/i/�i/�irrlt ar Mictugan rd la m/i ui / Figure 3-4 Upper Midwest Wind Zones [(Current Year) 2011] subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1960] = 51 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 511 divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 118] = .43 Furthermore, the historic frequency calculates that there is a 100% chance of this type of event occurring each year. Except in cases where significant forest or range fires are ignited, lightning generally does not result in disasters. For the period of 1995 to 2011, NOAA reported one death, 3 injuries, and 18 damage reports in Lake County, as shown in Table 3-30. The property damage losses were primarily the result of lightning strikes to houses. The $500,000 loss in 1998 was the result of a strike to a home with a million dollar value. The strike resulted in serious damage to the roof and attic of the building. Lake County recorded lightning strikes are mapped in Exhibit 3-7. Risk Assessment I^I 3-42 �� June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Figure 3-5 Flash Density Associated With Lightning Strike i i s rn��wurre'up�ry 14 tcr lE� 1 el r it y� n c �.✓ f lr�%y n � �' � r � �� „� to 11�To Swrc :�Jii ht in sstct .nca ov(NOAA) Table 3-30 Lightning Strikes In Lake County(1995-2011) (NCDC) ..... Location Date #Of #Of Property Damages Fatalities Injuries w....................... ...._..._ Round Lake Beach 8/9/1995 0 1 $0 Hi he ._. Waukegan 5/28/1998 0 0 $500,000 .................... 0 ... ........ .................._. 9/11/2000 0 Kildeer 100,000 W W.w Libert ille 9/22/2000 0 0 $25,000 Buffalo Grove 6/3/2002 1 _........_... 1 $0 Riverwoods 7/7/2003 0 0 $0 Vernon Hills 5/30/2006 0 0 $75,000 Wadsworth 5/30/2006 0 0 $200,000 ' Gra slake 8/24/2006 0 0 $40,000 Buffalo Grove 8/24/2006 0 0 $200,000 .... ...... 0 .. .. 0 $15,000 ........� Wauconda 4/2 Wauconda 4/25/2008 0 �_0 ...... $25,000 Lake Villa 6/5/2008 0 0 $10,000 Diamond Lake . .... 7/11/2008 0 0 _ _... $130,000 Mundelein 8/4/2008 0 0 $50,000 Ivanhoe 6/7/2009 0 _.. ....... $200,000 Deerfield 6/18/2010 0 0 $5,000 North Barrington mm� q 8/8/2010 0 0 ..$100,000 Mundelein _9/21/2010 1 0 ......... 0 $10,000 Total 1 3 $1,860,0001 Risk Assessment -� �� 3-43 �� June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan m � e _ r i z 9 di iv. w Ij 17 WS "•.x�m�w r" � 1 � p S Y t .0 h N m�rv�.uw°•w�t rv�z 'a..19 �.... P � S�wM&',w�r a 7 d � w mmm�- r o ' a ,A»Labe County. Illinois t Lightning Strikes Lake v, ,� .. ' �Rn , v. b aG ........ Exhibit 3-7 Lake County Lightning Events eno�wm -wmumommoummmummmmm�mrrmmmmmre�mmmmmnmrcimwmrc�m wrr �� m�mmu iarawmam mrmamnrw Risk Assessment 3-44 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. Reported lightning strikes over the past 16 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipality experiencing a lightning strike associated with damages or injury can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 22 lightning strikes since 1995 that have either caused damages to buildings and infrastructure or resulted in an injury or death, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every.73 years from 1995 through 2011. [(Current Year) 2011] subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1995] = 16 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 16] divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 22] = .73 Furthermore, the historic frequency calculates that there is a 100% chance of this type of event occurring each year. Seiche events impact the greater Chicago area, along with Lake County, around once a year, according to Jim Alsopp, Warning Coordination Meteorologist, of the Chicago National Weather Service Office. This occurs when a line of severe thunderstorms with strong winds moves from NW to SE across the southern part of Lake Michigan. Because of the shape of the lake, the results are high waves which cause the lake level to rise rapidly. He said that they get a minor seiche about once per year where the water levels rise about 2 to 3 feet along the piers on Lake Michigan. In 1954, a 10 foot seiche wave caused eight deaths in Chicago and lakeshore damage along the Illinois Lake Michigan shoreline. The most significant seiche event in the greater Chicago area occurred on June 26, 1954. On that date, a seiche formed as a result of a storm moving from NW to SE across Lake Michigan. This storm produced winds of up to 60 mph, and caused a seiche to develop and strike the coast of Lake Michigan near Michigan City, Indiana. This seiche was then defected by the shore and sent in a NW trajectory. It took more than an hour for that seiche to reach Chicago. When it did arrive, it did so with 10-foot waves. It struck the North Avenue Pier, and swept fishermen into the lake. Most were rescued. However, eight drowned as a result of the incident. In July 2011,Northern Illinois was impacted by a derecho (also known as a land hurricane). A derecho is a widespread, long-lived windstorm that is associated with a band of rapidly-moving showers or thunderstorms. The storm radar is shown in Figure 3-6. Risk Assessment 3-45 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation.Plan Figure 3-6 July 2011 Northern Illinois Storm 1� acine 9 12AdA BUT 11-Ju �d r san 'Pratr�� r r bag q yy BtICe r Took Oak Lawn ark 0 Ao� mmiw, oliet Park Farest0 Chic o n h a b rt t 1, �,r o Manhattan °Crete Crown P' oint Mfilrr�ington PeotoneCedarkeo o 2 .mi Source: National Weather Service This derecho, as it moved across Lake Michigan, produced recorded wind speeds in excess of 80 MPH. The result of these excessive winds was the movement of water from the west side of Lake Michigan, to the East side of the Lake. Once this storm cleared the lake, and the winds subsided, the water began to rush back towards the west bank of Lake Michigan. As a result, a seiche warning was issued for the Chicago Lakefront, and areas north,up into Wisconsin. There was an expected 2-foot rise in the waters on the western edge of the Lake, once the water began returning, and settling. Figure 3-7 shows a schematic of a 1954 Lake Michigan seiche. Risk Assessment 3-46 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The 1954 Seiche A storm front of one or �� more thunderstorm cells moves rapidly eastward r w ;Streit winds A seicheforms and 0'° " g moves eastward ....... _.—_" '"� ,Sudden increase - yaw air pressure _ . � After reaching the easte rn shore, part of the seiche is reflected L4KE MICHIGAN W1SG4�SlN1GN1A� N Chicago ,_ ��A ��y Michigan City ' Seiche approaches the Illinois shore E North W Avenue and builds to nearly twice its original height pi er S Figure 3-7 1954 Lake Michigan Seiche 3.5.2 Vulnerability—Severe Summer Storms Impact Lake County is subject to severe "summer" storms throughout the year. Severe storms which have the potential to cause flash flooding, tornadoes, downbursts, and debris. The severe storms profile in this section (Section 3.5) is primarily concerned with damage from hail, high winds, lightning, and other storm affects. All assets located in Lake County can be considered at risk from severe summer storms. This includes 703,462 people, or 100 percent of the County's population and all buildings and infrastructure within the County. Health and Safety: Three deaths and 27 injuries have been attributed to severe storms in Lake County. The threat to life and safety is present with severe thunder, lighting and wind storms. Hail rarely causes loss of life. No special health problems are attributable to thunderstorms, other than the potential for tetanus and other diseases that arise from injuries and damaged property. Impact to health and safety for severe summer storms is considered moderate. Damage to Buildings and Critical Infrastructure: Damage to roofs and siding and cars is frequently reported as a result of hail events. Depending on the hail size and wind severity, Risk Assessment 3-47 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan damage to awnings, glass, and siding can also occur. Critical facilities tend to be as vulnerable to severe storm damage as residences. The critical infrastructure typically of most concern during a severe storm is the electrical supply. Winds, lightning, falling branches and trees can damage substations, transformers,poles, and power lines. Impact to buildings and critical facilities for severe summer storms is considered moderate. Economic Impact: Communications can be disrupted by lightning. Signal disruptions due to lightning are common. In addition, communication lines, antennas, and towers can suffer damage from lightning and downed branches/trees. However, with the common occurrence of severe summer storms, recovery is relatively quick by utility companies. Economic impact to low for severe summer storms is considered low. Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: Each municipality in the County has an equal susceptibility to severe storms and lightning. Predictability again causes a great problem when discussing the probability of damage from high wind events. There is really no way to pinpoint exactly where, when, and to what extent a thunderstorm or other severe weather event will cause damage. However, we know that thunderstorm events, with high wind and dangerous lightning, are highly possible in the county. These storms are prominent in the early spring and continue through late fall. If located in a densely populated area of the county, it is easy to estimate damages in the millions of dollars from these events. 3.6 Severe Winter Storms « y �y [I , Lake County has been impacted by varying degrees of winter weather over the last century; however; the occurrence of severe winter weather in the county is relatively infrequent, even during winter months. Severe winter weather can cause hazardous t driving conditions, communications and 1 P✓��',U;9-au��f U �� 1 r q o. nh��w electrical power failure community isolation and can adversely affect business �� continuity. This type of severe weather pj% may include one or more of the followingYON ��'� winter factors: Lake County Source: David Christensen Blizzards, as defined by the National Weather Service, are a combination of sustained winds or frequent gusts of 35 mph or greater and visibilities of less than a quarter mile from falling or blowing snow for 3 hours or more. A blizzard, by definition, does not indicate heavy amounts of snow, although they can happen together. The falling or blowing snow usually creates large drifts from the strong winds. The reduced visibilities make travel, even on Risk Assessment 3-48 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan foot, particularly treacherous. The strong winds may also support dangerous wind chills. Ground blizzards can develop when strong winds lift snow off the ground and severely reduce visibilities. Heavy snow, in large quantities, may fall during winter storms. Six inches or more in 12 hours or eight inches or more in 24 hours constitutes conditions that may significantly hamper travel or create hazardous conditions. The National Weather Service issues warnings for such events. Smaller amounts can also make travel hazardous, but in most cases, only results in minor inconveniences. Heavy wet snow before the leaves fall from the trees in the fall or after the trees have leafed out in the spring may cause problems with broken tree branches and power outages. Ice storms develop when a layer of warm (above freezing), moist air aloft coincides with a shallow cold(below freezing)pool of air at the surface. As snow falls into the warm layer of air, it melts to rain, and then freezes on contact when hitting the frozen ground or cold objects at the surface, creating a smooth layer of ice. This phenomenon is called freezing rain. Similarly, sleet occurs when the rain in the warm layer subsequently freezes into pellets while falling through a cold layer of air at or near the Earth's surface. Extended periods of freezing rain can lead to accumulations of ice on roadways, walkways, power lines, trees, and buildings. Almost any accumulation can make driving and walking hazardous. Thick accumulations can bring down trees and power lines. 3.6.1 Severe Winter Storm Hazard Profile The science of meteorology and records of severe weather are not quite sophisticated enough to identify what areas of the county are at greater risk for damages. Therefore, all areas of the county are assumed to have the same winter weather risk countywide. Severe winter weather can result in the closing of primary and secondary roads, particularly in rural locations, loss of utility services, and depletion of oil heating supplies. Environmental impacts often include damage to shrubbery and trees due to heavy snow loading, ice build-up, and/or high winds which can break limbs or even bring down large trees. Gradual melting of snow and ice provides excellent groundwater recharge; however, high temperatures following a heavy snowfall can cause rapid surface water runoff and severe flash flooding. The State of Illinois has an extensive history of severe winter weather. In the winter of 2011, the state was hit by a series of winter storms. These storms included ice storms, followed by unseasonably high temperatures and high rainfall totals, all of which resulted in extensive flooding and mudslides. This series of storms resulted in Presidential Declaration FEMA-DR- 1960-IL. This declaration provided over eighty-four million dollars in recovery funds. These funds included Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant funds. Winter weather is a common occurrence in Illinois throughout the winter, and early spring months. According to the National Climatic Data Center, there have been 35 winter events in Lake County since 1994 (Table 3-31). The potential severity of winter storms are often difficult to predict,but through identifying various indicators of weather systems, and tracking these indicators, it provides means of Risk Assessment 3-49 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan monitoring winter weather. Understanding the historical frequency, duration, and spatial extent of winter weather assists in determining the likelihood and potential severity of future occurrences. Table 3-31 Severe Winter Storms In Lake County (1994-2011) (NCDC) Event T a Date Winter Storm 12/6/1994 Heavy Snow 1/18/1995 Winter Storm 12/8/1995 Winter Storm 1/9/1997 Winter Storm 1/15/1997 ........ Heavy Snow 11/14/1997 ........ Heavy �WWmmITITITIT � m9m� Snow 1/8/1 98 Heavy Snow 3/9/1998 Winter Storm 12/6/1994 Heavy Snow* 1/18/1995 Winter Storm 12/8/1995 Winter Storm 1/9/1997 W Winter Storm 1/15/1997 Winter Storm 12/6/1994 Heavy ... _...... .._._..�,. ...... Sn ow 1/18/1995 Winter Storm 12/8/1995 ........ __ ._. Winter Storm 1/9/1997 Winter Storm* 1/15/1997 Winter Storm 12/6/1994 _... _ ..... .. _...._.. Heavy Snow 1/18/1995 _.......... ...._.Hea �.. ..... .5.....__ vy Snow 12/1 /2007 Heavy Snow 12/31/2007 Winter Storm 1/29/2008 Winter Storm 2%5/2008mmm008 Winter Storm 3/21/2008 Winter Storm 12/19/2008 Winter Storm 1/9/2009 ...... _ .._._......--_.-- Winter Storm 3/28/2009 Winter Storm 12/26/2009 ................ Winter Storm 1/7/2010 Winter Storm 2/9/2010 Winter Storm mm 1_..1_... 2/11/2/2010 Winter Storm 1/3 1/2011 Heavy Snow Storms can immobilize a region and paralyze a city. These events can strand commuters, close airports, stop supplies from reaching their destinations and disrupt emergency and medical services. Accumulations of snow can cause roofs to collapse and knock down trees and power lines. Homes and farms may be isolated and unprotected livestock may be lost. The cost of snow removal, repairing damages, and the loss of business can have economic impacts on cities and towns. Risk Assessment 3-50 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Reported heavy snow events over the past 17 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing a flood event can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 32 winter storm events since 1994, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every .53 years from 1994 through 2011. [(Current Year) 20111 subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1994] = 17 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 17] divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 32] = .53 The historic frequency calculates that there is a 100% chance of a severe winter storm event occurring each year. Ice accumulations can lead to downed trees, utility poles and communication towers. Ice can disrupt communications and power while utility companies repair significant damage. Even small accumulations of ice can be extremely dangerous to motorists and pedestrians. Bridges can overpasses are particularly dangerous because they freeze before other surfaces. An ice storm is a type of winter storm characterized by freezing rain. The US National Weather Service defines an ice storm as a storm which results in the accumulation of at least .25 inch of ice on exposed surfaces. Three ice storms were recorded in the NCDC, including ones on January 26, 1997, December 1 and December 11, 2007. The December 1, 2007 event had$1,000 of recorded damage. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing an ice event can be difficult to quantify,but based on historical record of 3 ice events since 1994, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every 5.67 years from 1950 through 2011. [(Current Year) 2011] subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1994] = 17 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 171 divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 3] = 5.67 The historic frequency calculates that there is a 18% chance of this type of event occurring each year, but it is recognized that ice storm conditions that may be coupled with snow storm events may mean that the frequency may be greater than the data presents. 3.6.2 Vulnerability - Winter Storm Impact All of Lake County is vulnerable to severe winter storms. Severe winter storms can lead to power outages, downed trees and branches, hypothermia, injuries and loss of life. Climate data maintained by the Illinois State Water Survey indicates that between 1900 and 2000, Illinois can expect to receive a six inch or more snowfall within a 48 hour period at least twice a year. In Illinois, severe winter storm losses since 1950 average an estimated $102 million, annually. Severe weather storms can immobilize large areas with rural areas being particularly impacted by impassable roads. Health and Safety: Health hazards related to walking and snow removal are frequent and life- threatening. Falls, particularly to the elderly, can result in serious injury including fractures, Risk Assessment 3-51 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan broken bones, and shattered hips. Middle-aged and older adults are susceptible to heart attacks from shoveling snow. An average of six deaths per year are attributable to winter storms in Illinois. While vehicular accidents are often caused by the driver's lapse in judgment, the weather and its impact on roads are also a major factor. Blowing snow, ice and slush create slippery pavement making vehicle travel less safe during and immediately following winter storms. The injuries and deaths that occur when winter storm are present could be reduced through mitigation. While most injuries caused by snow and ice storms result from vehicle accidents, about 25% of all winter storm injuries occur to people caught outside in a storm. The effect of cold on people is magnified by wind. As the wind increases, heat is carried away from the body at an accelerated rate, driving down body temperature. Frostbite (damage to tissue) to hands, feet, ears, and nose, and hypothermia(lowering of body temperature below 95 F) are common winter storm injuries. Impact to health and safety for severe winter storms is considered moderate. Damage to Buildings and Critical Infrastructure: Information gathered from residents of Lake County indicates snow and ice accumulations on communication,power lines, and key roads pose the most frequent infrastructure problems. Accumulations on above-ground electrical lines often create power outages. These power outages vary from several hours to several days. Dangerous driving conditions frequently occur during and shortly after severe winter storms. State and county roads in Lake County that experience repeated drifting result in road closures and greater susceptibility to accidents. When transportation is disrupted, schools close, emergency services are delayed, some businesses close, and some government services are delayed. There is a financial cost to road departments. An average snow storm is defined as requiring 12 hours of work each day for two days, consuming approximately 40 tons of road salts, and 600 gallons of fuel to maintain County roads in Lake County. Highway departments and road district budget for snow removal, but budgets can easily be exceeded. Impact to buildings and critical facilities for severe winter storms is considered moderate. Economic Impact: Loss of power means businesses and manufacturing concerns must close down. Loss of access due to snow or ice covered roads has a similar effect. There are also impacts when people cannot get to work, to school, or to the store. Economic impact to low for severe winter storms is considered low. Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: Each municipality in the County has an equal susceptibility to severe winter storms and most storms impact the entire county and the northeastern Illinois region. Risk Assessment 3-52 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.7 .I rought Drought is a normal part of virtually all climates, including areas with high and low average rainfall. It is caused by a deficiency of precipitation and can be aggravated by other factors such as high temperatures, high winds, and low relative humidity. Droughts can be grouped as meteorological, hydrologic, agricultural, and socioeconomic. Representative definitions commonly used to describe the types of drought are summarized below. Meteorological drought is defined solely on the degrees of dryness, expressed as a departure of actual precipitation from an expected average or normal amount based on monthly, seasonal, or annual time scales. Hydrologic drought is related to the effects of precipitation shortfalls on streamflows and reservoir, lake, and groundwater levels. Agricultural drought is defined principally in terms of soil moisture deficiencies relative to water demands of plant life, usually crops. Socioeconomic drought associates the supply and demand of economic goods or services with elements of meteorological, hydrologic, and agricultural drought. Socioeconomic drought occurs when the demand for water exceeds the supply as a result of a weather related supply shortfall. The incidence of this type of drought can increase because of a change in the amount of rainfall, a change in societal demands for water(or vulnerability to water shortages), or both. The Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) is a drought index based on the probability of an observed precipitation deficit occurring over a given prior time period. The assessment periods considered range from 1 to 36 months. The variable time scale allows the SPI to describe drought conditions important for a range of meteorological, agricultural, and hydrological applications. For example, soil moisture conditions respond to precipitation deficits occurring on a relatively short time scale, whereas groundwater, streamflow, and reservoir storage respond to precipitation deficits arising over many months. The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) was developed by Wayne Palmer in the 1960s and uses temperature and rainfall information in a formula to determine dryness. It has become the semi-official drought index. The Palmer Index is most effective in determining long term drought—a matter of several months—and is not as good with short-term forecasts (a matter of weeks). It uses a 0 as normal, and drought is shown in terms of minus numbers; for example, minus 2 is moderate drought, minus 3 is severe drought, and minus 4 is extreme drought. The index is shown in Table 3-32. Risk Assessment 3-53 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-32 Drought Severity Classification RETURN DROUGHT DESCRIPTION OF POSSIBLE NDMC* PERIOD Standardized Palmer SEVERITY (YEARS) IMPACTS Precipitation Drought Index(SPI) Drought Index Category .................,. Going into drought; short-term dryness slowing growth of crops or Minor 3 to 4 pastures;fire risk above average. -0.5 to-0.7 DO -1.0 to- Drought Coming out of drought; some 1.9 lingering water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered. .......... .. —... .. ..... . ...... . Some damage to crops or pastures; fire risk high; streams, reservoirs,or Moderate 5 to 9 wells low, some water shortages -0.8 to-1.2 D1 �2. t Drought developing or=imminent,'voluntary 2.9 water use restrictions requested. / .. ,r .:r ,.,, ,r/:r /""/i✓„r, r , r r .::. ,,,.., y r t i ,,, r""`% / , / r. ,rc.,i ,.//r ,,. r1 ! �// .../r,, /. rr r / ., 1. ,..r.^ ..✓� r.. ,r(I ,.,:,A.r.,. ,! n., ,/, r ////, /./,IJ,, / ,.,, /,.r, ,. ,,// ,, r %` r / ✓� i y/ / �/ n, Ai / r r a ,,f r � �� r/ / r rd, / s/ /�✓r r c/rr/%/�,/2 I��,�r��l �,//�/�1�Diar,JOa/r/i//r�,,//fii%�//,/>�//,/,�rl//Jii ri//r,✓lrrlr,/ .,,,r,,,i�//�i�! „rf��„//�>��///, / // sy a � I Source: National Drought Mitigation Center Risk Assessment 3-54 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.7.1 Drought Hazard Profile There is no commonly accepted approach for assessing risk associated with droughts given the varying types and indices. Drought risk is based on a combination of the frequency, severity, and spatial extent(the physical nature of drought) and the degree to which a population or activity is vulnerable to the effects of drought. The degree of Lake County's vulnerability to drought depends on the environmental and social characteristics of the region and is measured by its ability to anticipate, cope with, resist, and recover from drought. Mapping of the current drought status is published by the National Integrated Drought Information System(NIDIS): U.S. Drought Portal which can be found online at: www.clrought.gov Due to the nature of drought, it is extremely difficult to predict,but through identifying various indicators of drought, and tracking these indicators, it provides us with a crucial means of monitoring drought. Understanding the historical frequency, duration, and spatial extent of drought assists in determining the likelihood and potential severity of future droughts. The characteristics of past droughts provide benchmarks for projecting similar conditions into the future. The probability of Lake County and its municipalities experiencing a drought event can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 9 droughts since 2005, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every .67 years from 2005 through 2011. The following summarizes the previous occurrences as well as the extent or severity of the drought events in Lake County. Information obtained from the Storm Events Database and the Illinois Emergency Management Agency show three reported drought events in Lake County between 1983 and August 31, 2009. Comprehensive damage information was either unavailable or none was recorded for any of the events. Also, no drought-related injuries or deaths were reported. • In 1983, all 102 Illinois counties were proclaimed state disaster areas because of high temperatures and insufficient precipitation beginning in mid-June. • In 1988, approximately half of the counties in Illinois (including Lake County) were impacted by drought conditions, although none of the counties were proclaimed state disaster areas. Disaster relief payments exceeding $382 million were paid to landowners and farmers as a result of this drought. • In 2005, drought conditions impacted much of the state, including Lake County. Dry conditions reached a historic level of severity in some parts of Illinois and ranked as one of the three most severe droughts in Illinois based on 112 years of data. According to the National Climatic Data Center this drought, listed from June 2005 to February 2006, had no significant property damage loss since 2005, and no significant damages to agriculture have occurred either. The odds of a drought in any year are most likely less than 10 percent,but it is recognized that droughts can extend over multiple years. Risk Assessment 3-55 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Paleoclimatology Program studies drought by analyzing records from tree rings, lake and dune sediments, archaeological remains, historical documents, and other environmental indicators to obtain a broader picture of the frequency of droughts in the United States. According to their research, "...paleoclimatic data suggest that droughts as severe as the 1950's drought have occurred in central North America several times a century over the past 300-400 years, and thus we should expect(and plan for) similar droughts in the future. The paleoclimatic record also indicates that droughts of a much greater duration than any in the 20th century have occurred in parts of North America as recently as 500 years ago." Based on this research, the 1950's drought situation could be expected approximately once every 50 years or a 20% chance every ten years. An extreme drought, worse than the 1930's "Dust Bowl,"has an approximate probability of occurring once every 500 years or a 2% chance of occurring each decade. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2003). A 500-year drought with a magnitude similar to that of the 1930's that destroys the agricultural economy and leads to Earthquake/Seismic Activities is an example of a high magnitude event. Impacts to vegetation and wildlife can include death from dehydration and spread of invasive species or disease because of stressed conditions. However, drought is a natural part of the environment in Illinois and native species are likely to be adapted to surviving periodic drought conditions. It is unlikely that drought would jeopardize the existence of rare species or vegetative communities. Environmental impacts are more likely at the interface of the human and natural world. The loss of crops or livestock due to drought can have far-reaching economic effects. Wind and water erosion can alter the visual landscape and dust can damage property. Water-based recreational resources are affected by drought conditions. 3.7.2 Vulnerability— Drought Impacts Health and Safety: Drought events affect the entire County in any one of the four drought categories discussed above. Much of the county and municipalities rely on groundwater for their source of drinking water. With the anticipated growth in the total County population, this will be a growing concern. The agricultural community will continue to be affected by droughts. All communities in Lake County are subject to drought-related impacts. A drought, however, evolves slowly over time and the population typically has ample time to prepare for its effects. Should a drought affect the water available for public water systems or individual wells, the availability of clean drinking water could be compromised. This situation would require emergency actions and could possibly overwhelm the local government and financial resources. Damage to Buildings and Critical Infrastructure: Drought had little impact on buildings. Possible losses/impacts to critical facilities include the loss of critical function due to low water supplies. Severe droughts can negatively affect drinking water supplies. Should a public water system be affected, the losses could total into the millions of dollars if outside water is shipped in. Private springs/wells could also dry up. Possible losses to infrastructure include the loss of potable water. Risk Assessment 3-56 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Economy Impact: The largest economic impact of drought is to agriculture. While livestock can be impacted, the greatest concern is for row crops and produce. Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: Due to the nature of drought, all jurisdictions within Lake County are expected to be impacted equally due to drought conditions. 3.8 Earthquake An earthquake is the motion or trembling of the ground produced by sudden displacement of rock usually within the upper 10—20 miles of the Earth's crust. Earthquakes can affect hundreds of thousands of square miles, cause damage to property measured in the tens of billions of dollars, result in loss of life and injury to hundreds of thousands of persons, and disrupt the social and economic functioning of the affected area. Most property damage and earthquake- related deaths are caused by the failure and collapse of structures due to ground shaking which is dependent upon amplitude and duration of the earthquake (FEMA, 1997). The impact an earthquake event has on an area is typically measured in terms of earthquake intensity. Intensity is most commonly measured using the Modified Mercalli Intensity(MMI) Scale based on direct and indirect measurements of seismic effects. A detailed description of the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale is shown in Table 3-33. Table 3-33 Modified Mercalli Intensity Corresponding Scale Intensity Description Of Effects Richter Scale Magnitude f I Instrumental Detected only on seismographs ,Feeble I Some people feel it ............ ........... ..... <4.2 77 Felt by people resting; like a truck rumbling by IV Moderate Felt by people walking .._. .. _ .... ........ ... _. V Slightly Strong Sleepers awake; church bells ring <4.8 VI . . _. . _.. .._..... .............. ........ Strong Trees sway; suspended objects swing; objects <5.4 fall off shelves VII Very Strong Mild alarm, walls crack, plaster falls <6.1 /% %/',/!" i i/ i Moving cars uncontrollable, r ;li J �r�� e, masonry fractures, [� ��/ <6.7 poorly constructed buildings damaged Risk Assessment 3-57 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-33 Modified Mercalli Intensity Corresponding Scale Intensity Description Of Effects Richter Scale Magnitude .m _ ...... Some houses collapse, ground cracks, pipes break open Ground cracks.._ ............ . ....._ ........ profusely, many buildings destroyed, liquefaction and landslides <7.3 widespread ...... ......_. _........ Most buildings and bridges collapse, roads, railways, pipes and cables destroyed, general <8.1 triggering of other hazards ® � Total destruction, trees fall, ground rises and falls >8 1 in waves One way to express an earthquake's severity is to compare its acceleration to the normal acceleration due to gravity. Peak ground acceleration(PGA)measures the strength of ground movements in this manner. PGA representh e rate in change of motion of the earth's surface during an earthquake as a percent of the established rate of acceleration due to gravity.` r µ The lack of noticeable activity in Lake County can be JQ�� „✓�� l partly attributed to the PGA. PGA is partly determined � i " ` by what soils and bedrocks are present in the area. In ' J Lake County, the PGA is relatively low. Lake County is in the border area of eight (8) to six (6) PGA. This is interpreted as the area having the possibility of eight (8)percent to six (6)percent of gravities acceleration listed as lg. These numbers would be denoted as .08g and .06g respectively. When the peak acceleration nears .1 g, damage may be caused to poorly constructed buildings while acceleration nearing .2 would create loss of balance and greater damage to lesser quality structures. Risk Assessment 3-58 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.8.1 Earthquake Hazard Profile Southern Illinois lies on the immediate boundary of the New Madrid fault, centrally located at New Madrid, Missouri. This particular fault has created significant activity over the last 200 years. The most intense activity occurred in the years 1811-1812. Two earthquakes estimated to be 7's on the Richter scale hit the New Madrid Fault. However, Lake County is located on the edge of the New Madrid fault area. According to the USGS-National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project(NSHMP), Lake County is predicted to have only a 2-3% chance of a magnitude 5.0 or greater earthquake over a 100-year period. Illinois has recorded 364 earthquakes over the last two centuries. The majority of the earthquakes have had epicenters in the Southern portion of the state and have not been felt in Lake County. Recent Earthquakes in Illinois are shown in Table 3-34. Table 3-34 Recent Earthquakes In Illinois Richter Scale Dat e E icenter 5 May 10, 1987 Near Lawrenceville, IL 4.5 Sep.28, 1989 15 miles south of Cairo, IL . ......_ �. ... 4.7 Apr.27, 1989 15 miles SW of Caruthersville, MO 4.6 Sep.26, 1990 10 miles south of Cape Girardeau, MO ....... ...... 4.6 May 3, 1991 10 miles west of New Madrid, MO 4.2 Feb.5, 1994 Lick Creek-Goreville Area 4.2 June 28,2004 10 miles NNW of Ottawa, IL __..... ..................... ......... . 5.2 April 18, 2008 Wabash County, Illinois 3.8 February 10, 2010 Pinegree Grove, Kane County, IL Source: Illinois Hazard Mitigatio" n Plan 20 f 0, and USGS The most recent earthquake in northern Illinois occurred on February 10, 2010 at around 4:00 a.m. USGS recorded the earthquake as 3.8 in magnitude with the epicenter at Pinegree Grove in Kane County and was felt in Lake County. Prior to that, a 5.2 earthquake on April 18, 2008, with epicenter in Wabash County, Illinois, was felt in Lake County. As shown in Figure 3-8, people in Lake County reported feeling the earthquake. People can report to USGS through their "Did You Feel It" website. USGS classified the Lake County reports from the April 2008 earthquake as "II" or weak. Risk Assessment 3-59 � � June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Figure 3-8 "Did You Feel It" Reports for April 18, 2008 Earthquake in Wabash County, Illinois USCS Community Internet fntensity Map ILLINOIS Apr 18 2008 04:36- CDT 38.45N 87.891M 115.4 Depth: 11 km ID:us200Bgra6 42`Cf m_ �.... .. 42`N t f A 3t ,Y bra 40°N ` 40°N / Nr�)or Orb w �, 38°N 1' 38 N � 4 y�waattl �� arur �vr�0lwai��r-0N�r 317' .. 4qp I�atl �r n 36'N , n - �." d 4 m 1 t u paa n Ill rza ZIP cod (Ma ��01-�"I I� 1,0 rA � � ,.. ,�,,....�. 92'W gC W 88`W 8 a"W 34V Ir,rr6NSfTl' I.. ��.�G��Q �� 1 �I,� ................. ., .. .. .. - _.._.........R< SHAKING }Vdc$F�Ytf 4r�a rollr J LIteB (rtiB wd rnP«y� �tuan� ' err Pram r re Wrr�I nP j r in ins:• .... .... .......... DAMp,�E j ncgr. f nr.gE nmr. I'Ve�,01��phtj Light 1A�u:as:�r:w��n'�^ Od�.;^<:aw� 1 The future probability of earthquakes in Illinois is 100%, however the probability for a seismic event with the epicenter within Lake County is low. A large magnitude event in southern Illinois will be felt in Lake County, though the event would most likely cause limited structural damage in Lake County. Primarily historic and masonry building would be damaged. Risk Assessment 3-60 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 9ummmuu uw mmaw�✓mp Y�i.. .0 mmWmm wmrowam.. my 3.8.2 Vulnerability —Earthquake Impact As mentioned previously, Lake County has peak acceleration much below that number, thus providing a buffer from most seismic activity. However to the proximity to the New Madrid Fault Line, the State of Illinois could be subject to an earthquake with a magnitude of 7.0 or more. Northern Illinois has had earthquakes with magnitudes of four and five in the previous century. These events are infrequent, and thus, predicting the amount of damage would be difficult due to a lack of history of events with epicenters in Lake County. The most active seismic county in proximity to Lake is Cook County, with eight events. Health and Safety: Health and safety concerns due to earthquakes for the people of Lake County is low. Damage to Buildings and Critical Infrastructure: As mentioned, historic and masonry building could be damaged by a large southern Illinois. Most other building, and especially those built under a building code would have little or no damage. Some content damage can be expected where items fall from shelves. Economic Impacts: Potential for business loss due to earthquakes is low, however environmental impacts of earthquakes can be numerous, particularly if indirect impacts are considered. Some examples are shown below, but are unlikely to occur in Lake County: • Induced tsunamis and flooding or landslides; • Poor water quality; • Damage to vegetation; • Breakage in sewage or toxic material containment, and • Breakage of natural gas and other pipelines that serve Lake County Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: All Lake County jurisdictions can be impacted by earthquakes. 3.9 Dam Failure A dam is defined as a barrier constructed across a watercourse for the purpose of storage, control, or diversion of water. Dams typically are constructed of earth, rock, concrete, or mine tailings. A dam failure is the collapse, breach, or other failure, often resulting in down-stream flooding. A dam impounds water in the upstream area, referred to as the reservoir. The amount of water impounded is measured in acre-feet. An acre-foot is the volume of water that covers an acre of land to a depth of one foot. As a function of upstream topography, even a very small dam may impound or detain many acre-feet of water. Two factors influence the potential severity of a full Risk Assessment 3-61 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan or partial dam failure: the amount of water impounded, and the density, type, and value of development and infrastructure located downstream. Dam failures typically occur when spillway capacity is inadequate and excess flow overtops the dam, or when internal erosion(piping) through the dam or foundation occurs. Complete failure occurs if internal erosion or overtopping results in a complete structural breach, releasing a high- velocity wall of debris-laden water that rushes downstream. Dam failures can result from any one or a combination of the following causes: • Prolonged periods of rainfall and flooding, which cause most failures; • Inadequate spillway capacity, resulting in excess overtopping flows; • Internal erosion caused by embankment or foundation leakage or piping; • Improper maintenance, including failure to remove trees, repair internal seepage problems, replace lost material from the cross section of the dam and abutments, or maintain gates, valves, and other operational components; • Improper design, including the use of improper construction materials and construction practices; • Negligent operation, including the failure to remove or open gates or valves during high flow periods; • Failure of upstream dams on the same waterway; • Landslides into reservoirs, which cause surges that result in overtopping; High winds, which can cause significant wave action and result in substantial erosion; and Earthquakes, which typically cause longitudinal cracks at the tops of the embankments, which can weaken entire structures. Dam failure hazards are considered to be localized impact and affect specific inundation areas downstream of the dam. Discharge from a dam breach is usually several times the 1% chance flood, called the probable maximum flood, and require a dam breach analysis (hydraulic modeling study). Determining the impact of flooding is difficult to accomplish, especially for estimating loss of life. Loss of life is a function of the time of day, warning time, awareness of those affected and particular failure scenarios. Many dam safety agencies have used"population at risk", a more quantifiable measurement of the impact to human life, rather than"loss of life". Population at risk is the number of people in structures within the inundation area that would be subject to significant personal danger, if they took no action to evacuate. The impacts of a dam failure are contingent on many factors and, therefore, cannot be concisely described. When they do occur, dam or levee failures can have a greater environmental impact than that associated with a flood event. Large amounts of sediment from erosion can alter the landscape changing the ecosystem. Hazardous materials can be carried away from flooded out properties and distributed throughout the floodplain. Industrial and agricultural chemicals and wastes, solid wastes, raw sewage, and common household chemicals comprise the majority of hazardous materials spread by flood waters along the flood zone, polluting the environment and contaminating private property and the community's water supply. Risk Assessment 3-62 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.9.1 Hazard Profile Dam safety laws are embodied in the Dam Safety and Encroachments Act ("DSE Act") -enacted July 1, 1979 and last amended in 1985. Rules pertaining to dam safety are found in Title 25- Rules and Regulations; Part I-Department of Environmental Resources; Subpart C-Protection of Natural Resources; Article II-Water Resources; Chapter 105-Dam Safety and Waterway Management ("the Rules")-adopted Sept. 16, 1980. (www.damsafety.org) Dams are categorized in one of three classes according to the degree of threat to life and property in the event of dam failure. According to 17 Illinois Administrative Code (IAC), Class I dams are: "dams that are located where failure has a high probability for causing loss of life or substantial economic loss in excess of that which would naturally occur downstream of the dam if the dam had not failed. A dam has a high probability for causing loss of life or substantial economic loss if it is located where its failure may cause additional damage to such structures as a home, hospital, a nursing home, a highly traveled roadway, a shopping center, or similar type facilities where people are normally present downstream of a dam." 171AC defines Class II dams as: "dams located where failure has a moderate probability for causing loss of life or may cause substantial economic loss in excess of that which would naturally occur downstream of the dam if the dam had not failed. A dam has a moderate probability for causing loss of life or substantial economic loss if it is located where its failure may cause additional damage to such structures as a water treatment facility, a sewage treatment facility, a power substation, a city park, a U.S. Route, or Illinois Route highway, a railroad or similar type of facilities where people are downstream of the dam for only a portion of the day or on a more sporadic basis." 0 17 IAC defines Class III dams as: "dams located where failure has a low probability for causing loss of life, where there are no permanent structures for human habitation, or minimal economic loss in excess of that which would naturally occur downstream of the dam if the dam had not failed. A dam has a low probability for causing loss of life or minimal economic loss if it is located where its failure may cause additional damage to agricultural fields, timber areas, township roads or similar type areas where people are seldom present and where there are few structures." Class I and II dams in Lake County are listed in the Table 3-35. The location of all Lake County Dams is also mapped in Exhibit 3-8. Risk Assessment 3-63 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-35 Class I And II Dams In Lake County -Class Name Stream .... ........... Forest Lake Dam Tributary to Indian Creek ..._ ...................... . . .. ............ �.......... i St. Mary's Lake Dam Bull ..... .� Creek ................................... I Countryside Lake Dam Indian Creek ....... ...... I Lake Charles Dam Seavey Drainage Ditch I Buffalo Creek Dam Buffalo Creek eek ... .............. ........ I Tullamore Dam Seavey Drainage Ditch ................................. _ ...... .. ... VI Hawthorn Parkway Dam Seavey Drainage Ditch II Round Lake WDam Tributary to Squaw Creek II Sylvan Lake Dam Tributary to Indian Creek 11 Loch Lomond Dam Bull Creek II Lake Zurich Retail Center Dam No name Not listed in Table 3-35 is the Stratton Lock and Dam in McHenry. A potential failure of the Stratton Dam at the Stratton Lock and Dam would have a large impact on the Fox Chain O' Lakes in Lake County, but the condition of the dam and the locks are closely monitored by IDNR-OWR. A dam can fail at any time, given the right circumstances. However the probability of future occurrence is for regulated dams can be reduced due to proactive preventative action in compliance with IDNR-OWR's dam safety program. Illinois' dam safety program provides for safety recommendations for signs, buoys, and short- and long-term structural modifications— including dam removal. As a dam ages, the likelihood for failure increases as undesirable woody vegetation on the embankment, deteriorated concrete, inoperable gates, and corroded outlet pipes become problems. Since dam failures are often exacerbated by flooding, the probability of dam failures can be associated with projected flood frequencies. 3.9.2 Vulnerability—Dam Failure Impact Since dam failure is currently considered a lower priority hazard for Lake County, a vulnerability analysis was not conducted. Also, a dam-breach analysis and mapping of potential dam breach inundation areas is most appropriate for examining vulnerability. If deemed appropriate, dam failure vulnerability will be examined in the 5-year update of this ANHMP. Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: Most Lake County communities have a dam located within their jurisdiction, as shown in Exhibit 3-8. Risk Assessment � � 3-64 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan y ` k ° �" ly 9 ail m f q Ewa ,� py E, Ij p ,6 s r, c� ryf L „w,w,,,,.,,. fr'� , r ?9 V., G� ro p ." w L a off a E 9�y („ if f"v ..nuns m�wwiww c tlJ y V.A s� h" a,.t rw,u-wWu a,awrr*. � BI ..._.,.._., v r I l ° anw�= 0 - m q Me ME µ �.... _.... ........A„ EJa�Y� Labe County, Illinois mm RkW6 T.M7, Darns Lake tEMW'10 .C��:�'a�. 6 :v. c yy Maim TY11pe a % iC.� R aaav�r _ h Exhibit 3-8 Lake County Dams Risk Assessment 3-65 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.10 Temperature Extremes Extreme temperatures can be dangerous due to the way that they affect individuals who are exposed to them. Extreme heat is usually defined through a combination of temperature and humidity. Extreme cold is based on the temperature with wind chill. The recorded extreme heat events have occurred from June through September. Recorded extreme cold events in Northern Illinois have occurred from December through February. Extreme temperatures can be dangerous to people, and crops. Extreme heat is characterized by temperatures that hover 10 degrees or more above the average high temperature of a region for several days to several weeks. In comparison, a heat wave is generally defined as a period of at least three consecutive days above 90°F. Extreme Heat is the number one _- weather-related killer in the United Relationship between Heat Index and Heat Disorders States. It causes more fatalities each ITITIT .�. year than floods, lightning, tornadoes Heat index(°F) Heat Disorders and hurricanes combined. Fatigue is possible with prolonged exposure 90°F and/or physical activity. In the Midwest summers tend to .... � Heat cramps,heat exhaustion and heat stroke combine both high temperature and high 90°F—105°F possible with prolonged exposure and/or humidity. Heat disorders generally have .._......... physical activity. to do with a reduction or collapse of the Heat cramps,heat exhaustion and heat stroke 105°F—130°F likely;heat stroke possible with prolonged body's ability to shed heat by circulatory exposure and/or physical activity. g g 130°F or Higher.,. Heat stroke - mmmITu changes and sweating or a chemical Heat stroke highly likely with continued (salt) imbalance caused by too much exp sweating. When the body heats too Source: NOAA quickly to cool itself safely, or when too much fluid is lost through dehydration or sweating, the body temperature rises, and heat-related illnesses may develop. The most significant extreme heat event recorded by the NCDC occurred in 1995. According to NOAA, an intense heat wave affected northern Illinois from Wednesday, July 12 through Sunday, July 16, 1995. The heat wave tied or broke several temperature records at Rockford and Chicago. But what set this heat wave apart from others was the extremely high humidity. Dew point temperatures peaked in the lower 80s late Wednesday the 12th and Thursday the 13th and were generally in the middle and upper 70s through the rest of the hot spell. The combined and cumulative effects of several days of high temperatures, high humidity, intense July sunshine (100%possible sunshine recorded at O'Hare Airport in Chicago July 13) and light winds took their toll. 583 people died as a result of the heat in Chicago and surrounding areas. Lake County recorded 1 death in Ingleside as a result of this heat wave. Risk Assessment 3-66 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation.Plan NOAA's National Weather Service Heat Index Temperature (IF) 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 40 80- 81 8 85 88 91 94 cdr 45 8n 82 8- S7 89 9 31 061 60 81 8 r9 85 6,8 91 951 99 FJa 81 84 86 89 9 60 82 8 86 91 9 751 70 82-, 86 9;11 9'0 100�/11�,��Jf %�o 75 84 88 92 9 m- 80 8_` 39 94 1 86 8 51 90 95 1 90 91 98 9b 86 ' 1 1i'DevE o rrS//1 �jf 100 87 9�� 10031 Likelihood of Heat Disorders with Prolonged Exposure or Streuous Activity t �_ Caution Q rr E�-aren�r: autiar� '� Dariger E,,tine Ganger Figure 3-9—NOAA's National Weather Service Heat Index Extreme Cold: The term "extreme cold" can have varying definitions in hazard identification. Generally, extreme cold events refer to a prolonged period of time (days) with extremely cold temperatures. An extreme cold event to the National Weather Service can refer to a single day of extreme or record-breaking day of sub-zero temperatures. Extended or single day extreme cold events can be hazardous to people and animals, and cause problems with buildings and transportation. Wind Chill Index: The Wind Chill Index is a measure of the rate of heat loss from exposed skin caused by the combined effects of wind and cold. As the wind increases, heat is carried away from the body at a faster rate, driving down both the skin temperature and eventually the internal body temperature. Exposures to extreme wind chills can be life threatening. The NOAA's chart above shows the Wind Chill Index as it corresponds to various temperatures and wind speeds. As an example, if the air temperature is 5°F and the wind speed is 10 miles per hour, then the wind chill would be -IO°F. As wind chills edge toward -19°F and below, there is an increased likelihood that continued exposure will lead to individuals developing cold-related illnesses. Risk Assessment 3-67 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Frostbite and hypothermia Figure 3-10 Wind Chill are both extreme cold-related ` r illnesses that result when Wind Chill Chart �;�2m� � individuals are exposed to extreme temperatures and r wind chills, in many cases, as Sr n is v4 14 0 1 5 T rr��rrlr/%r� ,//� a result of severe winter 14 �21 12 2 �� lx storms. The following 10 24 17 11 4 2 -0 describes the symptoms 22 2' 1 >a� ub l 2 22 15 2 0 12 r associated with each. �� 0 7 ,� 27 20 ' � Frostbite. During 2' 12 'S 2 26 m2 12 4 's Wa, exposure to extremely cold 25 18 11 4 3 21, weather the body reduces 2�5 22 t circulation to the " extremities (i.e., feet, ' hands, nose, cheeks, ears, rJ«rr„ry rrr rrrrrrrrrrrf rrrrrrf y, trfl„J, rr ,r„r «rr r rrr„r ,,r„rrr,, r r rr,r rr rArr, r y etc.) in order to maintain Source: NOAA its core temperature. If the extremities are exposed, then this reduction in circulation coupled with the cold temperatures can cause the tissue to freeze. Frostbite is characterized by a loss of feeling and a white or pale appearance. At a wind chill of-19°F, exposed skin can freeze in as little as 30 minutes. See medical attention immediately if frostbite is suspected. It can permanently damage tissue and in severe cases can lead to amputation. Hypothermia. Hypothermia occurs when the body begins to lose heat faster than it can produce it. As a result, the body's temperature begins to fall. If an individual's body temperature falls below 95°F, then hypothermia has set in and immediate medical attention should be sought. Hypothermia is characterized by uncontrollable shivering, memory loss, disorientation, incoherence, slurred speech, drowsiness and exhaustion. Left untreated, hypothermia will lead to death. Hypothermia occurs most commonly at very cold temperatures,but can occur at cool temperatures (above 40°F) if an individual isn't properly clothed or becomes chilled. Extreme cold is also responsible for a number of fatalities each year. Threats, such as hypothermia and frostbite, can lead to loss of fingers and toes or cause permanent kidney, pancreas and liver injury and even death. Major winter storms can last for several days and be accompanied by high winds, freezing rain or sleet, heavy snowfall and cold temperatures. Fifty percent of cold-related injuries happen to people over sixty years of age. More than seventy-five percent happen to males, and almost twenty percent occur within the home. Extreme cold, in extended periods, although infrequent, could occur throughout the winter months in Lake County. Heating systems compensate for the cold outside. Most people limit their time outside during extreme cold conditions, but common complaints usually include pipes freezing and cars refusing to start. When cold temperatures and wind combine, dangerous wind chills can develop. Risk Assessment 3-68 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-36 Cold Weather Threat Levels ssive Cold Threat Level Descriptions Threat Level "An extreme threat to life and property from excessive cold." It is likely that wind chill values will drop to-35F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperatures less than or equal to-20F "A high threat to life and property from excessive cold." It is likely that wind chill values will drop to-28F to-35F for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature-1 5F to-20F. "A moderate threat to life and property from excessive cold." Moderate It is likely that wind chill values will drop to-20F to-28F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature-1 OF to-1 5F. " - "A low threat to life and property from excessive cold." Low It is likely that wind chill values will drop to-15F to-20F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature-5F to-10F. "A very low threat to life and property from excessive cold." Very'Low It is likely that wind chill values will drop to-1 OF to-1 5F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature zero to-5F. "No discernable threat to life and property from excessive cold." Non-Threatening Cold season weather conditions are non-threatening. 3.10.1 Extreme Temperature Hazard Profile Extreme Heat: Table 3-37 shows the past extreme heat events in northeastern Illinois. The most severe event was in July 1995, which resulted in 583 fatalities. The majority of the deaths occurred in Cook County. The temperatures soared to record highs in July with the hottest weather occurring from July 12 to July 16. The high of 106 °F (41 °C) on July 13 was the second warmest July temperature (warmest being 110 °F (43 °C) set on July 23, 1934) since records began at Chicago Midway International Airport in 1928. Nighttime low temperatures were unusually high; in the upper 70s and lower 80s °F (about 26 °C)—as well. Record humidity levels also accompanied the hot weather. The heat index reached 119 °F (48 °C) at O'Hare airport, and 125 °F (52 °C) at Midway Airport. Risk Assessment 3-69 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 3-37 Extreme Heat Events In Lake County 11995-2011 #OF #OF LOCATION DATE FATALITIES INJURIES Northeast Illinois July 12, 1995 583 0 Northeast Illinois July 21, 1999 13 0 Northeast Illinois Jul 28, 1999 99 0 ....... TOTALS 695 0 No damages were reported with the recorded extreme heat events. Reported high heat events over the past 16 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing a high heat event can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 30 heat events since 1995, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every 5.33 years from 1995 through 2011. [(Current Year) 2011] subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1995] = 16 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 16] divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 3] = 5.33 The historic frequency calculates that there is an 18% chance of an extreme heat event occurring each year. Extreme Cold: Table 3--38 shows the recorded extreme cold events for northeastern Illinois. Table 3-38 Extreme Cold Events In Lake County (1996-2011) _... ......_.. #Of #Of Location Date Fatalities In'uries Northeast Illinois 2/2/199mmmIT -__....... Northeast Illinois 1/23/2003 1 0 Northeast Illinois 1/29/2004 .___..... 0 0...._ Northeast Illinois 2/18/2006 1 ........ _. 0 Northeast Illinois 2/3/2007 0 0 Northeast Illinois 2/10/2008 0 0 Northeast Illinois _� 12/21/2008 0 0 ........ ............ _.... � .._. . � ......� Northeast Illinois 1/15/2009 0 0 TOTALS.. 5 0..... Reported extreme cold events over the past 15 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing an extreme cold event can be difficult to quantify, but Risk Assessment 3-70 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan based on historical record of 8 extreme cold events since 1996, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every 1.87 years from 1996 through 2011. [(Current Year) 2011] subtracted by[(Historical Year) 1996] = 15 Years on Record [(Years on Record) 15] divided by[(Number of Historical Events) 8] = 1.87 The historic frequency calculates that there is a 53% chance of an extreme cold event occurring each year. 3.10.2 Vulnerability— Extreme Temperature Impact In Illinois, vulnerability to extreme heat has primarily impacted the elderly and persons with pre- existing health problems who live in high-rise buildings or other housing with inadequate ventilation or cooling systems. Since these housing conditions are not prevalent in Lake County, extreme heat is considered a lower priority hazard. If land-use changes elevate the risk from extreme heat, a vulnerability analysis can be conducted when this Plan is updated. Extreme cold can affect all ages. Health and Safety: Lake County, like most areas of the Midwest, is very vulnerable to extreme heat. Urban areas are exposed more acutely to the dangers of extreme heat due to heat being retained in asphalt and concrete and being released at night. This effect brings little relief to the area even in the nighttime. People are at risk for heat stroke or sun stroke, heat exhaustion, and dehydration. Children and the elderly are most at risk. Loss of life is common with extreme heat events. Loss of life is also common with extreme cold events. Safety is also a large concern during extreme cold events, and numerous injuries can occur, including frost bite and other accidents. Therefore, impact on people due to extreme heat and extreme cold is high. Damage to Buildings: Heat has little or no impact on structures. Extreme cold can cause water pipes to burst, but there is limited other damage. Impact on buildings is low. Damage to Critical Facilities: Extreme heat can have an impact on the demand on electric utilities, otherwise the impact to critical facilities due to extreme heat is low. Extreme cold can have an impact of community owned water mains that can burst. Economic Impact: Economic impact of extreme heat and extreme cold is low. Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: All of Lake County is at risk with extreme temperature. Risk Assessment 3-71 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.11 Erosion (Coastal and Ravine) Coastal Erosion is measured as the rate of change in the position or horizontal displacement of a shoreline over a period of time. It is generally associated with storm surges, hurricanes, windstorms, and flooding hazards, and may be exacerbated by human activities such as boat wakes, shoreline hardening, and dredging. Coastal erosion is a hydrologic hazard defined as the wearing away if land and loss of beach, shoreline, or dune material as a result of natural coast processes or manmade influences. It can be manifested as recession and degradation of major dune systems or development of steep scarps along the near shore beach face. Natural coastal processes that cause coastal erosion include the actions of winds, waves, and currents. Human influences include construction of seawalls,jetties, navigation inlets and dredging,boat wakes and other interruptions of physical processes. Ravine Erosion may be the result of naturally occurring inputs, such as precipitation, or human intervention in the form of urban development, forestry, mining, flow diversions, flood regulation, navigation, and other activities. The basic premise is that streams are constantly attempting to attain a state of balance involving the stream geometry(dimensions, pattern, profile), the properties of the stream bed, the bank material, and the external inputs imposed. (FENLA,Riverine Erosion Hazard Areas, 9/99) Flowing water has the energy to erode most of the soils in Lake County. The steeper the channel and the greater the runoff volume, then the higher the flow velocity and the greater the erosion potential. Areas prone to the most erosion damage are the bluffs and ravines, lake shores, and high energy flow streams. Channelized stream reaches are less stable and more erosive than meandering sections. Erosion in the ravines commonly threatens sanitary sewers, roads, and building foundations. Lake erosion affects boat facilities, septic systems and building foundations. Erosion on fast flowing streams may threaten bridges and roads, and may also encroach on septic systems and foundations. All eroded sediment is eventually deposited where water flow slows: i.e., in lakes, wetlands, stream channels or floodplains. The site where sediment accumulates may be far from the eroded area. Sedimentation can block culverts and ditches, cause the loss of channel conveyance and reduce floodplain storage, thereby creating or worsening flooding problems. In addition to exacerbating flood problems, excessive sediment loads degrade water quality and recreational assets. Sediment removal can be very expensive and may be cost prohibitive. Risk Assessment 3-72 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3.11.1 Erosion Hazard Profile Erosion in the ravines commonly threatens sanitary sewers, roads, and building foundations. Lake erosion affects boat facilities, septic systems and building foundations. Erosion on fast flowing streams may threaten bridges and roads, and may also encroach on septic systems and foundations. Bank erosion impacts can potentially affect 4.58% of Lake County. This consists of areas with slopes 8% or greater, which translates to approximately 13,900 acres out of a total of approximately 303,600 acres in Lake County. This percentage is for all of Lake County, both inland and coastal slopes. The potential of bank erosion in Lake County is relatively high due to the number of steep slopes, streams, and channels in the Lake Michigan Watersheds. There has been no recorded history, however, of landslides in Lake County. Coastal erosion is the landward displacement of the shoreline caused by the forces of waves and currents (as defined by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). For the purposes of this plan coastal erosion will be referred to, as "lake erosion". It is the process that affects the landmass of an area as a consequence of a body of water acting upon it. Although Lake County is bordered entirely on the east by Lake Michigan, only the southern two-thirds of the shoreline included steep slopes that are affected by erosion. Other steep slopes do appear along some of the County's lakes and streams. Generally, these areas have been protected from development due to the significant constraints that they pose. Lake erosion can take place on large or small lakes. Urbanization along many of the shores of the Great Lakes has frequently led to increased erosion. Wooded ravines that may have been stable for thousands of years have recently undergone active streambed down cutting and bank erosion that can be attributed primarily to loss of natural streambed armor and higher levels of storm water run-off. Numerous methods have been used with varying degrees of success to minimize soil erosion in these ravines (Draft Report to Great Lakes Commission"Ravine Erosion Control— Sediment/Nutrient Transported Reduction Through Vegetative Stabilization", Dr. Charles W. Shabica). The shoreline of Lake Michigan is not static. "The historical record of coastal change along the Illinois shore of Lake Michigan indicates that the most dynamic coastal area in the state of Illinois is located between the Illinois-Wisconsin state line and the Waukegan Harbor" (ISGS, 1998:1). Erosion and accretion creates a constant need to dredge harbor areas and fill along the shoreline. 3.11.2 Vulnerability - Erosion Hazard Impact The greatest potential for coastal erosion occurs on steep slopes. According to the Lake County Regional Framework Plan, steep slopes, 8% and greater in Lake County cover approximately 16,895 acres, or 18.52 square miles, which translates into approximately 4% of the County area. rmmmmmmm i. w�mww�umn�mwiw�u.w i�iwx�rewuw mwammm i �mmmmm u+mwmamwm�mm.mw�mmmw�umw mmnis Risk Assessment 3-73 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan A coastal erosion hazard can potentially affect 4% of the communities within Lake County(per the Regional Framework Plan). In order to provide the most accurate information for each affected community in Lake County, aerial maps should be overlayed with coastal erosion maps to determine the location of potentially impacted structures. The information should then be ground-proofed to determine the number and type of impacted structures. This information will identify the magnitude of potential impacts that coastal erosion can cause to the County, specifically determining the number of structures located along the shoreline of Lake Michigan. This activity should be considered during the next the 5-year update. Highland Park, Highwood, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest and North Chicago are potentially affected by coastal erosion, however the risk is low to structures in these communities. Multi-Jurisdictional Differences: The communities of Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Highwood, Highland Park,North Chicago and Winthrop Harbor are subject to coastal flooding from Lake Michigan. 3.12 Summary of Natural Hazards Risk Assessment This risk assessment examines natural hazards that could impact Lake County. This section summarized the impact of the hazards on Lake County and presents conclusions that can be drawn from the assessment. 3.12.1 Impact of the Hazards The impacts of the hazards are summarized according to the four major concerns: Health and safety Damage to buildings Damage to critical facilities and infrastructure Economic impact After the conclusion of the hazard assessments and vulnerability assessments of the priority hazards, the LPC discussed the findings in order to determine the overall impact the hazard has on the County and the municipalities. The hazards and their impact are shown in Table 3-39, "Lake County Summary of the Hazards." The different columns on the table represent the following: Annual Chance or Frequency: The annual chance column in the table shows the likelihood of occurrence in any given year. These numbers are discussed in the "Frequency" section of each hazard. Impact Location: The location and area affected by a single occurrence is shown. Square Miles Impacted: The portion of the County that is vulnerable to the hazard. Value of vulnerable property: The property damage exposure computed in Section 3.2 of this Chapter. Risk Assessment 3-74 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Potential Damage: The range of potential damage that could occur for the square miles impacted and the value of exposed property. Impact on Health and Safety: This category relates to health and safety hazards. Ratings of high, medium, or low are shown. Impact on Buildings: The vulnerability of structural damage to buildings or other property damage. Critical Facilities: The types of critical facilities and infrastructure that are affected are listed. Economic Impact: Typical impacts on businesses and utilities are listed in this column. The County, all municipalities, other agencies and institutions involved in this ANHMP are exposed to all identified hazards. This is due to the relatively flat topography of the County. While the County still has agricultural use, the residents and business are equally impacted by the identified natural hazards as the urban areas. Flooding in the floodplain has been considered, for example,but it is understood that flooding is not limited to floodplain areas. Community impact does vary by degree between larger and smaller communities based on population and number of buildings. Table 3-39 Summary of Lake County Natural Hazards ......... Impact on Impact Square Value of Health Impact on Annual Impact miles Vulnerable Potential and o Critical Economic Hazard Chance Location Affected Pro erty Dama a Safety Buildnin s Facilities Impact $85-$850 Floods 1% Flood plains 80 $1.7 billion million Moderate Hidh _Moderate High .....� p 10% a Moderate Moderate Moderate (Local 448 _ Moderat.......�W_Draina e) ITIT^^^^ $872 Tornado 0.01% Countyw ide 10 wm - $58 billion.. .. million Hi, h High _Moderate Moderate $419 30 00/° Community 5 $58 billion million High Hi h Moderate ° Moderate Severe Summer Storms 100% Communities 448 $58 billion — Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Severe Winter Storms 100% Moderate Moderate Low ITIT� Coun„ tywide ww 448 $58mbillion - mmIT Moderate mm wwww IT� w m .� ° vw..� _. p _...r _. Moderate Drou ht 1/° Count ide 448 $58 billion High Moderate Low Earthquake 100% Count ide 448 $58 billion Low Low Moderate Low Dam Failure 0% County ide 448 $58 billion Extreme Temperatures 18% ow Low w Count iLL 448 $58 billion High Low LmmmmmITIT yw 8 billion __ Erosion ........_. .._.. Count ide... 448 $5.. Table 3-40 shows the Lake County hazard identification by community and township for the natural hazards evaluated in Table 3-39. The findings of the hazard analysis and profile of Risk Assessment 3-75 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Chapter 2 and the vulnerability assessment were used as the foundation of goals and guidelines and mitigation activities developed in Chapter 5. Table 3-40 Lake County Hazard Identification Summary L � D>=M C- =LL .OaE £ O. y Ao O0 O d — 0 — M X LO Communities o WW W0:� Ym W U Village of Antioch X X X X X X X X X Village of Bannockburn X „_....._.. �mm. X X X X X X JX IT X Village of Barrington X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Village of Barrington Hills X X X X ITm_ Village of Beach Park X X X X X X X X X X Village of Buffalo Grove X X X X X X X X X ................. . ...... ....._ _.... Village of Deer Park X X X X X X X X X Villa a of Dee ,.— g field X X X X X X X X X .... _.. Village of Fox Lake X X X X X X X X X Village of Fox River Grove X X X X X X X X X Village of Grayslake X X X X....n� �..... ....._�•� _ ...... g y X X g X...X X X .. Village of Oaks WX X X X X X X X ..�, Village of Gurnee X X X X X X X X X ._ ............. Village of Hainesville X X X X X X X X X _. ............ Village of Hawthorn Woods X X X X X X X X X City of Highland Park - X X X X X X X X X X City of Highwood X X X X X X X X X X ......_ ....... .... Village of Indian Creek X X X X X X ........ . .. ......_ _... _. ......... ..... Village of Island Lake X X X X X X X X X Village of Kildeer X X X X ......X X _X X X _............ X Village of Lake Barrington X X X X X X X X X ... .........., ....-- Village of Lake Bluff X X X X X X TX X X X Ci y X X......_ X .. ...X ... X _ _ X X._.. it of Lake Forest X X IT Village of Lake Villa X X X X X X X X X w..pWWW Village of Lake Zurich X X X X X X X r X X Village of Lakemoor X X � ........� g X X X X X X X e of Libertyville X X X X.. Villa _ _.. gX ' X X X X .. f Lincolnshire Village of hire X X X X X X X X Xmmmmm Village of Lindenhurst X X X X X X X X X Village of Lon Grove X X X X X X Ig g X X X Village of Mettawa X X X X X X X X X Village of Mundelein X X... X X X X X X X Village of North Barrington _X X mm X X ITITIT X mXIT X X Xu City of North Chicago X X X X X X X X X X Village of Old Mill Creek X X X X..... .„ IT .. X X X X X mmmITITIT City of Park City X X X X X X X X...._ X .. ..Village of Port Barrington X i X w X T X X X X X Village of Riverwoods X X X X X X X X _._... ..... ..... .............. ........ ..... Village of Round Lake X X X X X X X X Village of Round Lake Beach X X X X X X X X ........ _�..... _ _....... .._ Village of Round Lake Heights X X X X X X X X Village of Round Lake Park X X X X X X X X Village of Third Lake X X X X X X X X Village of Tower Lakes X X X X X X X X Risk Assessment 3-76 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan m y m c E 0 c d m > 3 w J I O L (Q 0Ld1 GLI 0 O L LL dx O.>. O L 0�O ° mLm � 0O 0o CW N0 m a to Communities LL F- rn N rn w G W c W W W W U Village of Vernon Hills X X X X �....... X X X X Village of Volo X X X X X.... X X X Village of Wadsworth X X X X X X X X Village of Wauconda X X X X X X X X City of Waukegan X X X X X X X X X ... _ Village of Wheeling X X X X X X X X Village of Winthrop ......... mIT P Harbor... .. X X ...... �..ITITITITX X,_... X X X X X ... City of Zion X X X X X X X X X ...... .. _._.�. .. ._ _......_ Lake County X X X X X X X X X X 3.12.1 Comparison to State of Illinois 2010 Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan The 2010 Illinois Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan prepared by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency(IEMA) hazard rating system has five levels: low, guarded, elevated, high and severe. Lake County's hazard ratings for identified natural hazards are in the 2010 Plan are shown in Table 3-41. Table 3-41 IEMA Hazard R,atin s for Lake Count Hazard IEMA Rating Floods Elevated Tornado High Severe Summer Storms Severe Severe Winter Storms Severe Drought Guarded Earthquake Guarded Extreme Heat Elevated Risk Assessment 3-77 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Chapter Mitigation Goals The LPC established the goals for this ANHMP. The goals were developed to reflect current community priorities, to be consistent with current countywide planning efforts, and in consideration of the impact of each natural hazard that affects Lake County. In June 2011 the LPC participated in three exercises to outline the mitigation goals and for mitigation guidelines. 4.1 Community Priorities and Plan Direction To better understand community priorities, LPC members selected their top five choices to create a list of potential priorities. For community priorities, the top 5 selected responses were: • Improve employment opportunities • Improve roads and highways • Improve/get more businesses • Provide a safe place to live and work • Improve water quality For the second and third exercises, "What to Focus On" and"How to Fund and Implement," LPC members worked in groups and the top five choices of each table were shared with the entire group. The results from group to group for each of the exercises were very similar. For the exercise "What to Focus On,"the top five responses given by the small groups included: Protecting people's lives Protecting public health Protecting streets and utilities Protecting public services Protecting existing buildings Protecting critical facilities Protecting the elderly For the exercise "How to Fund and Implement,"the top five responses given by the small groups included: • Make people aware of how they can protect themselves • Make people aware of the hazards they face • Develop public/private partnerships • Help people protect themselves Mitigation Goals 4-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan • New developments should pay full cost of protection measures • Let those who benefit pay their share • Protect life/safety regardless of cost • Only fund projects where it's proven that the benefits exceed the costs • Seek user fees to fund measures • Use county/municipal agencies to implement mitigation activities • Use county/municipal agencies to pay for mitigation activities • Seek opportunities for shared service (added to list) 4.2 Goals and Guidelines From the above responses, the goals and guidelines listed below were developed. The goals represent the mitigation activity outcome and the guidelines represent the best methods to work towards the goals. At the July 2011 meeting, the LPC reviewed the goals and guidelines. The goals and guidelines presented in this chapter are the foundation of the Action Plan, presented in Chapter 6. The ANHMP goals are: Goal 1. Protect the lives, health, and safety of the people of Lake County from the impact and effects of natural hazards. Goal 2. Protect public services, utilities and critical facilities from potential damage from natural hazard events. Goal 3: Mitigate existing buildings to protect against damage from natural hazard events. Goal 4. Ensure that new developments do not create new exposures of people and property to damage from natural hazards. Goal 5. Mitigate to protect against economic and transportation losses due to natural hazards. The following guidelines are for the purpose of achieving the goals and to facilitate the development of hazard mitigation action items: Guideline 1. Focus natural hazards mitigation efforts on floods, tornadoes, severe summer and winter storms, dam failure, erosion, extreme temperatures, and drought. Guideline 2. Make people aware of the hazards they face and focus mitigation efforts on measures that allow property owners and service providers to help themselves. Guideline 3. Identify specific projects to protect lives and mitigate damage where cost- effective and affordable. Guideline 4. Use available local funds, when necessary, to protect public services, critical facilities, lives, health and safety from natural hazards. Guideline 5. Develop and foster public agency and private property owner partnerships to fund and implement mitigation measures, and examine equitable approaches for the local cost of mitigation, such as user fees. Mitigation Goals 4-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Guideline 6. Strive to improve and expand business, transportation and education opportunities in Lake County in conjunction with planned mitigation efforts. 4.3 Consistent with Other Mans The developed goals and guidelines were compared to the goals included in the 2002 Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan and the Lake County Regional Framework Plan. The Draft Flood Mitigation Plan goals were incorporated in to the goals shown above. Mitigation Goals 4-3 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan � mm m ma wmwrm�w � r Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategies and Capability Assessment This Chapter examines the hazard mitigation activities that are currently being implemented in Lake County, examines various hazard mitigation m W Mitigation ation Strategies � l strategies that can be undertaken in the future, and 9 9 assesses the capabilities of Lake County and the Preventative Measures municipalities for implementing some of these future Property Protection mitigation measures. • Natural Resource Protection • Emergency Services As described in Chapter 1, Lake County is a growing a Structural Measures county in both population and development. Chapter a Public Information 2 presents the priority hazards identified in this ANHMP (Tables 3-39) as flood, tornado, severe summer and winter storms and drought. The LPC concluded that these are priority hazards from both a countywide and a community specific perspective. For example, while there are no mapped floodplains in the Village of Indian Creek, flooding impacts the residents of Indian Creek as they travel to work or school. And mitigation efforts undertaken by Lake County for severe winter storms benefits the entire County as people travel to work or school. This Chapter presents a comprehensive list of hazard mitigation recommendations that provide a menu of options for the development of the action plan presented in Chapter 6 of this ANHMP, and presents an assessment of Lake County and the municipalities' capability of implementing these measures. These alternatives are consistent with the ANHMP goals presented in Chapter 4. All mitigation strategies recommended in this Chapter are available to all communities, and communities are not specifically identified for each particular strategy. Throughout this Chapter reference is made to the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC) and the Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance (WDO). The SMC has regulatory, project and funding authority for stormwater, floodplain, wetland and water quality management in both the corporate and unincorporated areas of Lake County. The WDO sets watershed development standards that exceed NFIP and state minimum requirements. The technical committee of the SMC includes SMC staff and municipal staff. They meet monthly to evaluate the implementation of and compliance with the WDO, and to provide input of watershed planning efforts undertaken by the SMC. The Lake County Emergency Management Agency(LCEMA) hosts a similar committee to foster countywide approaches to hazard mitigation and emergency response. Six basic strategies may be applied to mitigate the potential damage to property and impact to health and safety from natural hazards. Each strategy includes mitigation measures that are appropriate for different conditions, as shown in Table 5-1. For instance, planning and regulation measures as a preventative strategies are more appropriate for developing areas, while property protection strategies are approaches for existing development and buildings. mmuw,w wmum,m,rmowmuxmrvwmnw m'uwnwuruw immmmmmrurrcmmmmow..�w r im Mitigation Strategies 5-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan A significant number of hazard mitigation measures are already being implemented either throughout Lake County or with certain areas of the County. For example, the administration and enforcement of building codes provides protection of buildings from wind, flood and earthquake events. Preventive and natural resources protection measures are provided through the implementation of the Lake County stormwater management program. Table 5-1 Natural Hazard Mitigation Activities Property Resource mStructural Puii ........... i bic Natural Hazards; Preventive Protection Emergency Protection Measures Information Floods 100 ear/10 _ _..... X �..._.. . � Y Year) X X X X X X Tornado/High Wind X X X X e Summer Storms/ ail--_.HW Sev re X ._.... . X X X X X Severe Winter Storms X X Dam Failure X X X ..... X _ X Wildfire X X X X X _.... _..... ...... Erosion X X X X X Extreme H... _.......... .... ... X W....eat Extreme Cold .� X. ........ _. .X Sewer Backup X X X Drought Groundwater_ ... X .��.�........ ... ... Both the ongoing Lake County mitigation efforts and additional mitigation approaches are discussed below. At the end of each section relevant recommendations are listed. Note that specific project locations are not identified with many of the recommendations. For many recommendations,numerous project locations exist. Selection of specific project areas, for floodplain acquisition projects for example, is related to the voluntary interest of property owners and the commitment of community funds. It is understood that project locations will be included in various project scopes of work as they are developed. The following sections provide more detailed discussions of the six hazard mitigation strategies. 5.1 Preventive Measures As the name implies, preventive measures are designed to keep flooding problems from getting worse. They insure that future development does not increase flood damage, and include actions that maintain the drainage system's capacity to carry away floodwaters. The cost of implementing most prevention measures is relatively low in comparison to most remedial measures to reduce future damage. Preventive measures include activities such as:: • Planning and Zoning • Watershed Regulations • Building Codes • Standards for Manufactured Homes Mitigation Strategies 5-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Critical Facility Construction Requirements 5.1.1. Planning and Zoning 7)�,;, Groundwater &Zoning Activities "Planning" can cover a variety of community plansAddress: including,but not limited to, comprehensive plans, land t use plans, transportation plans, capital improvement plans, and economic development plans. While plans generally have limited authority, they reflect what the community would like to see happen in the future. Plans also guide other local measures such as capital improvements and the development of ordinances. Coart_ e iensive and lart�l use Al q generally identify how a community should be developed. Use of the land can be tailored to match flooding hazards, typically by reserving flood prone areas for parks, recreational trails, open space, golf courses, or similar compatible uses. Lake County adopted the Lake County Regional Framework Plan in 2007 and is currently in the process of updating that plan. Development in Lake County is also directed by the 2002 Lake County Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan adopted by the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC)to address county-wide stormwater planning needs and watershed regulations. The first countywide County Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan was adopted in 1990 in response to worsening flooding, drainage and water quality problems. SMC has developed a number of watershed-based eplggs for four major watersheds of the county including: Fox River Watershed: Fish Lake Drain, Flint Creek, Squaw Creek and Sequoit Creek Des Plaines River Watershed: North Mill Creek, Bull Creek and Indian Creek. North Branch Chicago River Watershed: North Branch of the Chicago River(Lake and Cook Counties) Lake Michigan Watershed: Kellogg Creek, Dead River and the Waukegan River. Adopted and draft plans and other information on the ongoing SMC planning efforts are available at: www.leakecoua ityj1.gov/µ A zonim,ordinanceregulates development by dividing the community into zones or districts and setting development criteria for each district. Zoning can be used to control development so that existing flood problems are not worsened and new flood problems are not created. The Lake County zoning ordinance, applicable to the unincorporated areas of Lake County, uses the overlay zoning approach. The Lake County ordinance classifies floodplains, wetlands, lakes, ponds, drainageways and drainageway soils with other natural resources as "natural resource protection areas." This classification requires that a pre-determined ratio of open space be met for developments impacting the designated natural resources. Mitigation Strategies 5-3 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan In addition, site development regulations limit the uses allowed in floodplains. Allowable uses, depending upon the underlying zoning district, may include parks, golf courses,boating facilities, parking lots, roads, nurseries and others. A number of Lake County municipalities have incorporated floodplain development restrictions into their zoning ordinances. A review of municipal zoning ordinances for development of the 1990 Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan found that 19 of 29 zoning ordinances reviewed included floodplain districts/requirements. (Forty ordinances were collected for the county's 51 municipalities, but only the 29 that were dated 1970 or later were reviewed.) Since the adoption of the WDO in 1992, additional municipalities and the County of Lake have incorporated the floodplain development restrictions of the WDO into their zoning and development ordinances. ubdivision ordinances specifically govern how land will be subdivided into lots, and regulate standards for infrastructure provided by the developer including roads, sidewalks, utilities, stormwater detention, storm sewers and drainage ways. Building codes should establish flood protection standards for all structures. Table 5-2 provides a list of community plans and ordinances. 5.1.2 Watershed Development Regulations watershed Develop ment As noted above, the WDO has been in place in Lake Regulations Reduce County since 1992. The goal of the WDO is to ensure that Damages Related to:. new development does not increase existing stormwater ➢ Floods roblems or create new ones. The WDO establishes ➢ Severe Storms p ➢ Dam Failure minimum countywide standards for stormwater ➢ Erosion management, including floodplains, detention, soil ➢ Sewer Backup erosion/sediment control, water quality treatment, and ➢ Drought wetlands. ➢ Groundwater � W The WDO is implemented by the SMC or by"Certified Communities." Forty of the 52 municipalities in the county are standard Certified Communities. The designation allows those communities to enforce WDO standards within their own jurisdictions, except for isolated wetlands. SMC reviews isolated wetlands unless a community becomes "Wetland Certified." Mitigation Strategies 5-4 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 5-2 Lake County Plans and Ordinances Compre- Storm- Capital Sub- Historical hensive water Improve- Land Use Zoning division Preservation "Community Plan M mt.Plan ment Plan Plan Onl Ordinance Ordinance Ordinance Village of Antioch Yes Yes A Yes Yes Village of Bannockburn Yes Yes Yes Villa e of Barrington Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Barrington Hills Yes Village of Beach Park Yes Village of Buffalo Grove Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes I Yes Village of Deer Park Yes Yes Village of Deerfield Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Fox Lake Yes Yes Village of Fox River Grove Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Grayslake Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Green Oaks Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Gurnee Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Hainesville Yes I Yes Yes Village of Hawthorn Woods Yes Yes Yes Yes City of Hi hland Park Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Highwood Yes Village of Indian Creek Yes Village of Island Lake Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Villa e of KildeerJ Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Lake Barrington Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Lake Bluff Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Cit of Lake Forest Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Villa a of Lake Villa Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Lake Zurich Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Lakemoor Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Villaqe of LibertyXille Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Lincolnshire Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Villa a of Lindenhurst Yes Yes Yes Village of Long Grove Yes Yes Yes Village of Mettawa Yes Village of Mundelein Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of North Barrington Yes Yes Yes City of North Chicago Yes Yes Yes Village of Old Mill Creek Yes Yes City of Park CityYes Yes Village of Port Barrington Yes i Yes Yes Villa a of Riverwoods Yes Yes Yes Village of Round Lake Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Round Lake Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Round Lake Yes Yes Yes Village of Round Lake Park Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of Tower Lakes Yes i Yes Yes Yes Village of Third Lake Yes Village of Vernon Hills Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Villa e of Volo Yes Yes Yes Village of Wadsworth Yes Yes Yes Village of Wauconda Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Village of WinthropHarbor Yes Village of Wheeling_ Yes Yes City of Zion Yes Yes Mitigation Strategies 5-5 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Compre- Storm- Capital Sub- Historical hensive water Improve- Land Use Zoning division Preservation Community Plan M mt.Plan ment Plan Plan Only Ordinance Ordinance Ordinance Lake County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes I J b, I I The WDO requires major improvements to existing buildings and all new building to have the lowest floor including the basement elevated to the Flood Protection Elevation (FPE), which is 2 feet above the base flood (or 100-year)elevation. For unincorporated areas, the Lakelount I'd�knmi.w&BUL1di, a d yq1g11 ign1 D� a (PS&D) is the permitting agency. SMC is the permitting agency for Ncni-Certified Communities. Even in Certified Communities, however, certain floodway and floodplain development applications are forwarded to SMC for review and approval. A WDO Per ni It is required for major and minor development, and public road construction. Table 5-3 shows the Certified Community status for the WDO, and also provided the Community Identification Numbers (CID) for the Lake County communities that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP). The NFIP sets the minimum floodplain regulation requirements for local floodplain ordinances. The State of Illinois enforces floodway standards that go beyond the NFIP minimum standards. Standards in the WDO reflect state and federal requirements for floodplain regulation and address specific Lake County flooding problems that occur in depressional storage areas and in unmapped floodplains/floodways. To address flooding in unmapped floodplains, the WDO definition of a regulatory floodplain includes smaller tributaries subject to more than one square mile of drainage, and depressional areas, not associated with streams, that have a storage volume of.75 acre feet or more when inundated by the base flood. Many Lake County municipal ordinances exceed the WDO standards in one aspect or another. The WDO insures minimum requirements are met, but does not prohibit individual communities from implementing stricter standards to protect their property owners from flooding. The WDO includes detention requirements that control the rate of stormwater release from developments. The allowable release rate is the determinant of the volume of stormwater that needs to be detained. The WDO specifies a uniform release rate for the entire County regardless of watershed. Although the WDO addresses the rate of stormwater release, Mitigation Strategies 5-6 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan it does fully regulate the increased volume of runoff. The increased volume of runoff ultimately collects in these large river basins resulting in higher flood elevations. Some runoff volume is addressed through the water quality requirement in the WDO. Table 5-3 Lake County WDO Certified Communities Community Certified IWLC Review CID Community Certified IWLC Review CID Village of Antioch X X 170358 Village of Lindenhurst X X 170379 Village of Bannockburn X 170359 Village of Long Grove I X X 170380 Village of Barrington X 170057 Village of Mettawa X 170381 Village of Barrington Hills 170058 Village of Mundelein X 170382 Village of Beach Park X X 171022 Village of North Barrington X X 170383 Village of Buffalo Grove X 170068 City of North Chicago X 170384 Village of Deer Park X 170028 Village of Old Mill Creek X X 170385 Village of Deerfield X 170361 City of Park City 170386 Village of Fox Lake X 170362 Village of Port Barrington X 170478 Village of Fox River Grove 170477 Village of Riverwoods X X 170387 Village of Grayslake X 170363 Village of Round Lake X X 170388 Village of Green Oaks X X 170364 VBelaagte of Round Lake X 170389 Villa a of Gurne11 e X Village of Round Lake X 9 170365 Heights 170390 Village of Hainesville X X 171005 Village of Round Lake Park X 170391 Village of Hawthorn Woods X X 170366 Village of Third Lake X 170392 City of Highland Park X 170367 Village of Tower Lakes 170393 City of Highwood Village of Vernon Hills X 170394 Village of Indian Creek Village of Volo X X 171042 Village of Island Lake X X 170370 j Village of Wadsworth 1 170395 Village of Kildeer X X 170371 Village of Wauconda X 170396 Village of Lake Barrington X X 170372 City of Waukegan X 170397 Village of Lake Bluff X 170373 Village of Wheeling 170173 City of Lake Forest X 170374 Village of Winthrop Harbor 170398 Village of Lake Villa X 170375 City of Zion 170399 a of Lake Zurich X Lake County Forest Village 170376 Preserve Village of Lakemoor 170915 Lake County Public Roads Village of Libertyville X 170377 County of Lake X X 170357 Village of Lincolnshire 170378 IWLC=Isolated Waters of Lake County Other aspects of the WDO are discussed in Section 5.3 of this Chapter. The WDO is currently undergoing an update process through the SMC and the SMC's Technical Advisory Mitigation Strategies 5-7 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Committee (TAC). More information and"0 resource documents are available at 1)14L" W,vyvW.late Sto riiiwater'/l l()od iiS'totinN� tate'r e ulat oils. 5.1.3 Best Management Practices Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) are used to help ensure longevity and improve the health of Lake County's watersheds. BMPs can be implemented by all stakeholders, including homeowners,businesses, organizations and municipalities. BMPs can be as simple as using phosphorous-free fertilizer to a more complex activity like a project restoring a large section of degraded streambank. The SMC website provides specific BMPs for different stakeholder groups: �wu.yak, cou'r1�1, o /Storiyiwater/ a:eCoLinwly aterslieds/ mRs/ ; ,, I �tr fol ! v /�%, i // r o �'�o it`%% ri' Strip p l�/�%�r j/�%'��///�!/l/�; /� r / j / ✓1/'p,�i�� r.; r %�i//i��i!/��//�/��i�% �,r��ra�'rlur�h %" �>;r / /%' i�r/��r/�r/�o„✓�oo�i/�'%' �a xx.'wr.'I�kruo-�;r;�*�, �`, / �%��/� �� . ��%/% ✓ �;�.. �'w ,,J/!irk i//r/I I �i i r��/ �i/i�//�/��//�/ r itiu VA Jip fwtw F Sl�� , Iv/r 1>t lj 7i r ,,eJJvVi ,.;vdue�lai� ia�i�av��°„ 1�i/�l�r�lrrr�rl' rw� '"" R"""i' !rr�� BMPs slow stormwater runoff and improve water quality. Source: Living With Wetlands,A Handbook for Homeowners in Northeastern Illinois BMPs can be integrated before, during, and after development. BMPs will not only help the environment, but in many cases they also can save you time and money. Every BMP is beneficial to the environment regardless of its relative cost,but it is the unique combination of BMPs for each property that truly will establish a healthy watershed. The"0 includes a number of water quality provisions that are within the site development, detention, erosion control and wetland standards. The picture above show the goal of the water quality impacts that can occur without water quality provisions incorporated into site design. Below is a photo of the green roof of the Lake County Central Permit Facility in Libertyville. Mitigation Strategies 5-8 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan frlfW. i II", ' ��/� r i err ryy »erro�f� l l °� � l�i�✓rr"u��/✓�rriY �e//,� 1 � � %✓i� �,�-,.,r, �y�,�;�;;�f� �m�' s��f'�I `�'�r,'ir1( ��?�r�/rr�grv�%�7'„ w I m ! ��r 1� � ✓, r�✓ r1/) / Jy �r�r 1� �o � Jar �i1 � rr a i P!; br N u nF� i ��r ,�1 r i NN/�r� � E o�,;�Ji A✓� /is r� IY ��,y �,, �,,,✓r �✓ �f�r1 f��dy %/r r% � t� �09� u�orb >f l ! lG��1��' �1 flVi ,,1+ir r t �✓�+ r 8 �w ✓/ tlu;/�Sr�rf w ✓��;Fai�ai� r,;f �� f�..- a� � li � i rrrtrf� r 6"� r�✓ ��i�r��v ^��,1� /✓f;, . M1 I ".✓ � a Yri sir Yf no�l�l (,�, � �� n> N '� s ii�'1 n 1`�y1y✓ f rJt�/� ! ar/�j iJ '!` a yd+ a N r � 1 yy ��1 �� iYiirY�ro%ao�l !�Jni�; ✓� �1 r � ,p f e f� r„ � !� ) ��/�;nary/ Sri✓ 9 f ��rG�l 1Nrm/ { "" P � , r .rrr�/ �a�1,1 �`,� :. � :e�xv« � ir1, ��s✓r7�Y�)� m�"�Yo9rff �'.5.1.4 Building Codes The administration and enforcement of building codes is one of the most effective approaches for addressing natural hazard mitigation. Building codes protect new structures from damage by tornadoes, high winds, snow storms, and earthquakes,. When properly designed and constructed according to code, the average building can withstand the impacts of most of these natural events. Additional hazard protection standards for all new, improved or repaired buildings can be incorporated into the local building code. Provisions that should be included are: Making sure roofing systems will handle high winds and expected snow loads. 0 Providing special standards for tying the roof, walls and foundation together to resist the effects of wind. Requiring new buildings to have tornado "safe rooms." * Including insulation standards that ensure protection from extreme heat and cold as well as energy efficiency. 0 Regulating overhanging masonry elements that can fall during an earthquake. 0 Ensuring that foundations are strong enough for earth movement and that all structural elements are properly connected to the foundation. Mandating overhead sewers for all new basements to prevent sewer backup. o Includes NF]P minimum standards for structures built in A Zones (riverine flooding) and V Zones (coastal flooding). Mitigation Strategies 5-9 June 2012 Lake Count) All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plai7 The predominate model building codes being adopted by communities are the International Code series (I-Codes), including the International Residential Code (IRC) and the International Building Code (IBC). The I-Codes require buildings to be built to the "design flood elevation" or DFE, which in effectively the base flood elevation (BFE) or 100-year elevation. Note that the WDO establishes a flood protection elevation (FPE), which is 2 feet above the BFE, so the WDO requirements exceed the I-Codes. The most recent version of the I-Codes is 2009. Some Lake County communities enforce the BOCA cost, but the majority of communities administer and enforce the IRC and IBC. Fortified Homes: The Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS) has a set ofJJ b recommendations to strengthen r a building to better resist the impacts of natural hazards that go beyond building codes. The ✓t °` specific requirements fora protected or a"Fortified" ✓' ✓✓✓ ' �� ;r�i ��;�„ home are available through the � � a` , '✓ �� y� n� � �'�� IBHS website at www.disastersafety.org (see " previous page). On the web site, a postal code (zip code) can be entered and regional recommendations are made for maintenance, new construction and businesses. New construction should also include the construction of an underground shelter or"safe room" at the first floor level to protect the lives of the occupants. A building code could require them in new construction. Tornado safe rooms are discussed further in Section 5.2 of this Chapter. Code Administration: Enforcement of code standards is very important. Adequate inspections are needed during the course of construction to ensure that the builder understands and implements the requirements. The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) is a national program used by the insurance industry to determine how well new construction is protected from wind, earthquake and other non-flood hazards. The BCEGS is similar to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Community Rating System and the century-old fire insurance rating scheme. With BCEGS, building permit programs are reviewed and scored, a class 1 community is the best, and a class 10 community has little or no program. ,'"ride Official'Tra niM,Training of code officials is also very important for code enforcement. Training of code officials and inspectors is a large part of the BCEGS rating for a community. Courses are offered through the building code associations to help local officials understand standards that apply to seismic, wind and flood hazards. Mitigation Strategies 5-10 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.1.5 Standards for Manufactured Homes Manufacture Home Installation v� Standards Address: Manufactured or"mobile"homes are usually not regulated by local building codes. They are built in a factory in ➢ Floods another state and are shipped to a site. They do have to ➢ Tornadoes meet construction standards set by the U.S. Department of ➢ Severe Storms Housing and Urban Development's National m Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards. These standards apply uniformly across the country and it is illegal for a local unit of government to require additional construction requirements. Local jurisdictions may regulate the location to these structures and their on-site installation. The greatest mitigation concern with manufactured housing is protection from damage by wind. The key to local mitigation of wind damage to mobile homes is proper installation. The Illinois Mobile Home Act and Manufactured Home Tiedown Code are enforced by the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH). The State code includes equipment and installation standards. Installation must be done in accordance with manufacturers' specifications. There is a voluntary program for installers to be trained and certified. Following the installation of a manufactured home, installers must send the state a certification that they have complied with the State's tiedown code. Inspections are only done if complaints are made regarding an installation. In addition to code standards to protect the mobile home from high winds is the need to protect the occupants. There are no state or federal requirements for shelters in mobile home parks. 5.1.6 Critical Facility Construction Critical Facility Construction Critical facilities, defined in Chapter 1 for purposes of Requirements Address: this ANHMP, are generally constructed with public ➢ Floods funds. The exception is usually health care facilities. ➢ Tornadoes The source of public funds can be federal, state or local. ➢ Severe Storms State of Illinois and federal government executive orders ➢ Winter Storms ➢ Extreme Heat require higher flood ➢ Extreme Cold protection standards for ➢ Wildfire critical facilities when G U I D EIX ES t 0 14 fiuided with state or federal dollars. Both orders require aANt�l NC IAA.(RIA) compliance when state or federal funds are used for the construction or permitting of any critical facility. Both the N'k. state and federal orders have consistent interpretations of "critical facilities". ` Illinois Executive Order 2006-05 requires that State agencies .. _. which plan, promote, regulate, or permit activities, as well as those which administer grants or loans in the State's floodplain ,.,. m..� areas, must ensure that all projects meet the standards of the Mitigation Strategies 5-11 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan State floodplain regulations or the NFIP, whichever is more stringent. The State Executive Order also guarantees the State's eligibility for certain types of federal disaster assistance. Critical facilities must be protected to the 500-year level (see box on following page). Excerpt from Illinois Executive Order 2006-05: "2. All State Agencies engaged in any development within a Special Flood Hazard Area shall undertake such development in accordance with the following: A. All development shall comply with all requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (44 C.F.R. 59- 79) and with all requirements of 92 Illinois Administrative Code Part 700 or 92 Illinois Administrative Code Part 708, whichever is applicable. B. In addition to the requirements set forth in preceding Section A, the following additional requirements shall apply where applicable: 1. All new Critical Facilities shall be located outside of the floodplain. Where this is not practicable, Critical Facilities shall be developed with the lowest floor elevation equal to or greater than the 500-year frequency flood elevation or structurally dry floodproofed to at least the 500-year frequency flood elevation. 2. All new buildings shall be developed with the lowest floor elevation equal to or greater than the Flood Protection Elevation or structurally dry floodproofed to at least the Flood Protection Elevation. 3. Modifications, additions, repairs or replacement of existing structures may be allowed so long as the new development does not increase the floor area of the existing structure by more than twenty (20) percent or increase the market value of the structure by fifty (50) percent, and does not obstruct flood flows. Floodproofing activities are permitted and encouraged, but must comply with the requirements noted above. 3. State Agencies which administer grants or loans for financing development within Special Flood Hazard Areas shall take all steps within their authority to ensure that such development meets the requirements of this Order. 4. State Agencies responsible for regulating or permitting development within Special Flood Hazard Areas shall take all steps within their authority to ensure that such development meets the requirements of this Order." The Illinois Department of Natural Resources-Office of Water Resources is required by the Order to assist state agencies with flood hazard information and assistance to carry out the Executive Order. Unfortunately, no agency has the authority to enforce the Executive Order. The Federal Executive Order 11988 has similar floodplain standards for federal agencies. Compliance with Federal Executive Order 11988 must be met for all "pass through" federal funding. These standards ensure that federal and state resources and funds are not being used for inappropriate and dangerous floodplain development. The 500-year flood protection level is also used for critical facilities in Executive Order 11988. 5.1.7 Other Preventive Measures Many times after a flood, flood victims say they would have taken steps to protect themselves if only they had known they had a floodprone property. Three regulations, one federal and two state, require that a potential buyer of a parcel be told of any flood hazard. Federal law: Federally regulated lending institutions must advise applicants for a mortgage or other loan that is to be secured by an insurable building that the property is in a floodplain Mitigation Strategies 5-12 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). Flood insurance is required for buildings located within the 100 year floodplain if the mortgage or loan is federally insured. This program does not apply to floodprone areas that are not mapped on the FIRMS. Floodprone areas that are frequently not mapped include the floodplains of smaller channels and many depressional areas. Depressional area flooding is a significant problem. The use of older flood studies in rapidly developing areas also results in outdated floodplain maps that do not reflect the actual flood risk. Illinois Compiled Statutes: Chapter 55, Section 5/3-5029 requires that all subdivision plats must show whether any part of the subdivision is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. Illinois Residential Real Property Disclosure Act: This law, which went into effect on October 1, 1994, requires a seller to tell a potential buyer if the seller is aware of any flooding or basement leakage problem, if the property is located in a floodplain, or if the seller has flood insurance. The law is not wholly reliable because the seller must be aware of a problem and willing to state it on the disclosure form. Due to the sporadic occurrence of flood events, a property owner may legitimately not be aware of potential flooding problems with a property being sold or purchased. 5.1.8 Preventive Measure Recommendations 1. Complete current and accurate floodplain maps for all Lake County watersheds and submit to FEMA for adoption. 2. The County and municipalities that participate in the NFIP should ensure that they fully and properly administer and enforce the requirements of the NFIP. 3. The County and municipalities should ensure that they fully enforce all provisions of the WDO and the forthcoming amendments. 4. Communities that have not adopted the International Series of Codes should do so, and on a regional basis, municipal and County code enforcement staffs should work together to develop building code language to strengthen new buildings against damage by high winds, tornadoes and hail, 5. All communities should work to improve code administration and enforcement, and should also be trained on implementing the codes that are applicable to hazard mitigation. 6. The adequacy or current requirements for manufactured home and recreational vehicle parks for protection from natural hazards should be examined, especially concerns pertaining to placement in flood prone areas, tie downs and sheltering. 7. On a regional basis, municipal and county planning and engineering staff should develop example subdivision ordinance language that requires new infrastructure to have hazard mitigation provisions, such as secondary access to subdivisions. 8. Offices responsible for design, construction or permitting critical facilities should ensure that the design accounts for natural hazards and adjacent land uses. Mitigation Strategies 5-13 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 9. Communities (certified and non-certified)need to understand and consistently enforce the WDO, and the TAC should continue their efforts in these areas. 10. Communities should consider joining the NFIP's CRS program. For the municipalities already involved in CRS, they should work to improve their CRS class. 5.2 Property Protection Property protection measures are used to modify or remove buildings subject to flood damage rather than to keep floodwaters away. Because of the widespread extent of flood damage caused by shallow, low velocity flooding in Lake County, traditional flood control structures such as levees and reservoirs are generally not economically justifiable in most areas. Individual property protection measures are usually the most preferred and cost- effective flood mitigation measures in these circumstances. Many property protection measures do not affect a building's appearance or uses, making them particularly appropriate for historical sites and landmarks. Although most property protection measures are paid for and implemented by individual property owners, there is increasing government interest and cost-share funding available for building relocation and acquisition, which are seen as permanent solutions to flood damage. While property protection is viewed as the property owner's responsibility, local governments can actively support and promote private efforts by providing technical assistance and incentives. Property protection measures include activities such as: o Building Acquisition/Relocation to Building Elevation, Floodproofing or Barriers • Building Structural Retrofitting • Insurance 5.2.1 Building Acquisition/Relocation Building Acquisition Acquisition ensures that buildings in a floodprone area will Address: cease to be subject to damage. The major difference is that ➢ Floods acquisition is undertaken by a government agency, so the cost is ➢ Severe Storms not borne by the property owner, and the land is converted to an ➢ Dam Failure appropriate public use such as a park. Acquiring and clearing buildings from the floodplain is not only the best long-term flood protection measure, it also is a way to convert a problem area into a community asset that can provide �� - environmental and recreational benefits. 9 � p The Village of Gurnee purchased properties in the 1990s when they came up for sale in the 4 floodway. In 1997, the SMC began coordinating the county's acquisition projects June 2012 Thisy home was acquired by the SMC and the m site was cleared for open space. r Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan in Sturm Subdivision and William's Park,two of the most repetitively flood damaged locations in the county. Acquisition funds were provided though FEMA mitigation grant programs. Since then SMC has coordinated five additional FEMA mitigation grant applications for the acquisition of flood prone properties in Lake Forest, Round Lake Beach, and unincorporated Lake County. To date, 198 repetitive flood loss and other floodplain properties have been acquired throughout Lake County. The FEMA funds are provided through IEMA to cover 75% of project costs. Cost share funds (25%)have been provided by the participating municipalities and the SMC. The structures on the acquired properties have been demolished and the property converted to open space. Exhibit 5-1 shows the location of SMC flood audit and floodplain buyout locations. SMC currently has two grant applications under review with FEMA which includes sixteen properties throughout the county. i � r rr./(G6r/r�lf, � rrr f;��SY 'i,r, �f,k�1 ri „rr r/ ,;,fir "x r�/t ��rl ri'E/o l�//Yc�Yod eYawr r a;,?r fT/�i/�//r%.„/�9�✓/H�f(,,,jro ,'Yl�//r'%�%!�1i i%"/��; r . e yrin w a� y i r � ,,,J Y �� l r,✓i C 0 Mitigation Strategies 5-15 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan SIVIC o,j'ecL, 4th Flood Audit & ^ Buyout 17 CCtIoI"1 tw I �� r.r', z gad f a. it? quo N y n 309 Projects 198 Buyouts 388 Flood Audits w �r ¢�... w ° a � P�el"� t � } are a 17 th Cr°nmTR z � m ooarion B In= V,,1 a.a on5 P71'7 •P - a w __,,:nd kthr!o cat)rtW r'oICB k51 flare �r P h Exhibit 5-1 Lake County SMC Flood Audit and Floodplain Buyout Locations t Lildin relocation: Moving a building to higher ground is the surest and safest way to protect it from flooding. While almost any building can be moved, the cost goes up for heavier structures, such as those made of brick, and for large or irregularly shaped buildings. Building relocation is generally cost-effective where flooding is relatively severe and/or frequent. Buildings that have suffered structural damage or contamination from frequent or long duration flooding should not be considered for relocation. While relocation is typically the responsibility of the building owner, government-sponsored loans or grants may be available for cost-share. Communities and county-wide agencies could play a greater role in building relocation by improving public and local official awareness of this option, identifying and prioritizing buildings or properties well-suited for relocation, and by locating potential cost-share funds to assist individual property owners. Mitigation Strategies 5-16 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.2.2 Building Elevation, Floodproofing or Barriers Elevation: Raising or elevating a house above the flood IElevation & Floodproofing level protects the structure and contents from flood Activities Address: damage. When flooding occurs, water levels stay below ➢ Floods the main floor, causing no damage to the structure or its ➢ Severe Storms contents. Raising a building above the flood level is less ➢ Sewer Backup expensive than acquiring it or moving it, and can be less IF], disruptive to a neighborhood. Commonly practiced in floodprone areas nationwide, this protection technique is required by law for new and substantially damaged residences located in a 100 year floodplain. Although flood damage can be reduced significantly or eliminated through building elevation, there are some limitations to remaining in a flood prone location. While the building itself is elevated sufficiently to be «y� protected from flood damage, flooding may a �Ir „iJi �f isolate the building making it inaccessible. In ✓ i% � � addition, flood waters can result in a loss of utility service in flooded areas making the building uninhabitable even though it isn't damaged, and pollutant contamination in s floodwaters will still threaten health and LOW This floodwall is in Lincolnshire. safety. As with acquisitions, structural elevation projects are voluntary. SMC has determined that cost-share for elevation projects is required from the homeowner and are best pursued by municipalities rather than the county. lrriers: Constructing barriers, such as floodwalls and berms, can keep floodwaters from reaching a building. Berms are commonly used in areas subject to shallow flooding. Not considered engineered structures, berms are made by regrading or filling an area. Low floodwalls may be built r around stairwells to protect the basement and ' lower floor of a split-level home. /K11 By keeping water away from the building This house was elevated one foot above the base flood walls, the problems of seepage and hydrostatic elevation of the Des Plaines River(prior to the adoption pressure are reduced. of the WDO). Use of floodwalls and berms must also include a plan to install drain pipes and/or sump pumps to handle leaks and water seepage through or under the barrier, and to get rid of water that may collect inside the barrier. Care must be Mitigation Strategies 5-17 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan taken in the design, location and installation of berms or floodwalls to insure that floodwaters are not inadvertently pushed onto an adjacent property. l�l�dpro— Floodproofing covers measures that provide either wet floodproofing or dry floodproofing. In areas where there is shallow flooding, dry floodproofing measures can be used to prevent water from entering some buildings. A wet floodproofing strategy will allow water to enter the building, but moves damageable belongings, appliances and utilities out of harm's way Dry Floodproofing: Dry floodproofing _.... is a combination of practices that are used to seal a building against floodwaters. Walls floors and all BERM openings must be sealed and made FLOODWATER ti watertight. Buildings with crawlspaces generally cannot be dry floodproofed _.. " WATERPROOFING EXISTING because water can seep under walls into I GROUND LINE _ n the crawlspace. However,buildings on slabs and buildings with basements can mmmms�mmmmim000mmmum��mmoioommmu • im�ou�tmu!m�htm'�nrrm�' wmmmu �vuu benefit from dry floodproofing. Dry Floodproofing -Buildings on slab • Walls are coated with waterproofing compounds or plastic sheeting. «� Openings,such as doors,windows, sewer lines and vents,are closed either permanently,with removable shields, or with sandbags. Dry Floodproofing-Buildings with basements • Waterproofing compound is applied to the walls before fill is placed against the side of the house. • Installation of a subsurface drain tile and sump pumps is a must to handle water that will naturally seep through the fill. • Surface water is kept away from the walls with backfill (see illustration). • Wet Floodproofing • Everything subject to damage by A structural engineer should be consulted to design the water or sediment is moved to a dry floodproofing measures due to the need to address higher level or out of the hydrostatic pressure against foundation walls that occur building. For example,the electrical panel and the furnace during floods. should be relocated to an upper 10 floor. Wet Floodproofing: Wet floodproofing provides } Where flooding is not expected damage protection from floodwaters that cannot be kept to be deep, items needing protection may be placed on out of a building. It is a relatively simple means of platforms or blocks. making sure that nothing gets damaged when L 1 floodwaters enter the building. Wet floodproofing includes some of the least expensive and easiest I. wt mitigation practices to install. a "' Wet floodproofing approaches range from moving a valuable items to a higher floor to rebuilding the Mitigation Strategies 5-18 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan floodable area. At the very least, several low-cost steps can be taken to wet floodproof a structure. Simply moving furniture and electrical appliances out of the floodprone area of the building can prevent thousands of dollars in damages. Wet floodproofing measures work wherever there is a level above the flood zone to which items can be relocated; in general wet floodproofing does not work for one-story houses where living areas get flooded. Sewer backup protection: Basement flooding can occur when the sanitary system overloads with stormwater and backs sewage up into the basement through the sanitary line. Even when sanitary and storm waters are carried in separate pipes, and they are though nearly all of Lake County, sewer backup can occur when cross connections between the storm and sanitary sewers exist, or if there are infiltration or inflow problems into the lines. Houses which have downspouts, footing drain tile, and/or a sump pump connected to the sanitary sewer service may be inundated when heavy rains overload the system. In addition to these sources, sanitary lines can also be inundated by stormwater by way of runoff infiltration into old leaky pipes or where the sanitary manholes are not properly sealed. Several Lake County communities experience very high sewage flows following heavy rain events. As in the case of Wauconda, some wastewater treatment plants cannot adequately treat the heavy volume of combined stormwater and sewage, so the plant is by-passed and sewage is discharged directly to surface waters untreated. If allowed by the local code, sump pumps, downspouts and footing drains should be disconnected from the sanitary sewer line and the rain and groundwater directed out onto the ground, away from the building. The solution to stormwater overload of the sanitary system also includes the need for timely maintenance of sanitary lines, repairing or replacing pipe where it leaks, and upgrading old waste water treatment ; „y facilities that are inadequate for the existing level of use. Until sanitary infiltration is fixed, a property owner may use four approaches to protect sanitary sewer openings from Automatic floor drain plug backup. Floor drain plugs or floor drain standpipes can be installed to keep water from flowing out of the floor drain into the building. However, these may not be effective if water gets deep enough in the sewer system to flow out of the next lowest opening, which is likely to be a toilet or utility sink. Overhead sewers and backup valves are more expensive, but more secure for this circumstance. An overhead sewer keeps water in the sewer line during a backup. A backup valve allows sewage to flow out, while preventing backups from entering the building. Septic system modification: In Lake County, septic failure is a common secondary result of flooding. Having septic tanks pumped as needed during periods of ponding, soil saturation or following a flood is one method of maintaining the usefulness of septic systems. In cases where the size of a single septic tank is inadequate, a second tank should be installed. Mitigation Strategies 5-19 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan lei r ... J, � r • _,. ,. i�" �. m w �., ij i Overhead sewer arrangement A second strategy to improve septic usefulness during high water periods would be to install an alternative system. The Wisconsin Mound septic system is constructed in soil, gravel and sand layers above the existing grade. The Wisconsin Mound may function better than traditional systems during high groundwater periods, but even their usefulness is limited under flood conditions. 5.2.3 Building Structural Retrofitting ° Building Retrofit Tornado Ret ofigim Tornado retrofitting measures Activities Address: include constructing an underground shelter or"safe ➢ Tornadoes room" at the first floor level to protect the lives of the ➢ Severe Storms ➢ Winter Storms occupants. Safe rooms are built by connecting all parts ➢ Wildfire of the shelter together(walls, roof and foundation) using adequate fasteners or tie downs. These help hold " �i the safe room together when the combination of high wind and pressure differences work to pull the walls and ceiling apart. The walls of the safe room are a constructed out of plywood and metal sheeting to protect people from windborne missiles (flying debris) with the strong winds of a tornado. More information on safe rooms can be found in FEMA Publication 320. EVE Rr, EATHER SHELTER AREA Another retrofitting approach for tornadoes and high winds is to secure the roof, walls and foundation 1 f with adequate fasteners or tie downs. These help hold the building together when the combination of 4 mimamwrw',ammmm imml ue„�:n.. :„ n,,� ..., , ,�..� � .gym .,.... -m..�um xmrvimmmmmmiw w.w� mmm um.. .K Mitigation Strategies 5-20 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan high wind and pressure differences work to pull the building apart. This measure also applies to manufactured homes. A third tornado and high wind protection modification is to strengthen garage doors, windows and other large openings. If winds break the building's "envelope,"the pressures on the structure are greatly increased. Impact- resistant glass is also recommended for high wind or tornado protection. Severe Strtn Retrofitti & Retrofitting approaches to protect private or public buildings from the effects of thunderstorms include: ;r Shelters n • Storm shutters ii • Lightning rods• 7 Strengthening connections and tie-downs Lightning protection measures I< (similar to tornado retrofitting) Source: State Farm Insurance • Impact-resistant glass in window panes • Surge protectors at electrical outlets Also, roofs can be replaced with materials less susceptible to damage by hail, such as modified asphalt or formed steel shingles. Winter Storm.RetroltttiM Winter storm retrofitting measures include improving insulation on older buildings and relocating water lines from outside walls to interior spaces. Windows can be sealed or covered with an extra layer of glass (storm windows) or plastic sheeting. Roofs can be retrofitted to shed heavy loads of snow and prevent ice dams that form when snow melts. Earthquake Retrtrrfitting— Buildings:,, l ui.ldin s: Earthquakes, or seismic events, present two hazards for buildings and people—a hazard for the structure itself and a hazard for the building's contents (non-structural hazard). Earthquake retrofitting measures for the structure include: Removing masonry overhangs that will fall onto the street during shaking Bracing the walls of the building provides structural stability Bolting sill plates to the foundation These measures can be very expensive and should be considered for buildings on a case by case basis. Measures that protect against non-structural seismic hazards typically involve small modifications. Retrofitting activities for non-structural hazards include: o Tying down appliances, water heaters, bookcases, and fragile furniture so they won't fall over during a quake Mitigation Strategies 5-21 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan • Installing latches on drawers and cabinet doors • Mounting picture frames and mirrors securely • Installing flexible utility connections for water and gas lines • Anchoring and bracing propane tanks and gas cylinders These approaches can be very cost effective and have little or no impact on the appearance of a building, yet they are important measures for keeping buildings safer and protecting lives during earthquake events. While these simple and inexpensive measures may be cost effective for a home or business, they may not be sufficient for protection of critical facilities. Fire stations need to be sure that they can open their doors and hospitals must be strong enough to continue operating during the shocks and aftershocks. Again, critical facilities should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Ea I�qa e Ret,i-(> ttin x ._1 fir,,structure nd I�i:felipes: Infrastructure hardening, attention to lifelines and bridge strengthening are important elements of earthquake mitigation. From FEMA Publication Number 271, Seismic Design Guidelines and Standards for Lifelines (1996): Lifelines are the public works and utility systems that support most human activities: individual, family, economic, political, and cultural. The various lifelines can be classified under the following five systems: electric power, gas and liquid fuels, telecommunications, transportation, and water supply and sewers. The first step in protecting lifeline systems is the prioritization of critical facilities, utility systems, and other infrastructure. The involvement of state agencies, such as the Illinois Department of Transportation, is important. The involvement of private owners of utility systems is also important. FEMA, through the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) and the Central United States Earthquake Consortium offer technical guidance on retrofitting approaches. 5.2.4 Insurance Insuranc e Addresses: s Insurance does not prevent flooding or flood damage; it ➢ Floods helps an owner protect his/her property investment by ➢ Tornadoes paying for repairs and replacement of items damaged in a ➢ Severe Storms ➢ Winter Storms flood. While a typical homeowner's insurance policy does ➢ Wildfire not cover a property for flood damage, flood insurance ➢ Sewer Backup coverage is available through the National Flood Insurance Program, as is additional basement backup insurance. National Flood insurance: In Lake County forty-three municipalities and the County participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Flood insurance is required as a condition of certain types of federal aid and most bank loans and mortgages for buildings located in the 100 year floodplains identified on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Mitigation Strategies 5-22 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan While the NFIP requires flood insurance for those at greatest risk, there are several weaknesses in the program. Many of the buildings subject to flooding in Lake County are not located in the 100 year floodplain as identified on the FEMA maps. In addition, many policy holders drop flood insurance following a period of dry years or after their mortgage is paid off, and/or do not buy enough insurance to cover their total risk(for instance for building contents). In spite of the federal law, it is estimated that fewer than 1 in 4 floodplain properties are covered under NFIP (Flood Hazard Mitigation in Northeastern Illinois, 1995). Nationally, 25% of NFIP claims are for flood damage to buildings located outside of the 100 year floodplain(the insurance requirement zone). In Lake County approximately 30% of the flood insurance policies are for properties outside the floodplain. Table 5-4 shows the number of insurance policies for each Lake County community. CID in Table 5-4 is the NFIP community identification number. Flood insurance is available for anyone, regardless of building location, and premiums are lower if your structure is not in a mapped floodplain. For this reason, if there is any risk of flood damage to a property, it is prudent to have flood insurance. There are ramifications for not having insurance required by the NFIP when future flood damage occurs. If property owners who were required to purchase insurance as a condition of receiving disaster assistance for a previous flood dropped the policy, they would lose their right to any future disaster assistance. In addition,under-insured public buildings will have the amount of flood insurance they should have carried deducted from any disaster assistance they may be eligible for after a flood. Community Rating System (CRS): FEMA created the NFIP's CRS program in 1990. It is designed to recognize floodplain management and other watershed management activities that go beyond NFIP minimum requirements. Communities that participate in the NFIP can apply for the CRS. When appropriate applications and reviews are completed, a community is awarded a CRS class rating. Residents and property owners of that community then qualify for a flood insurance premium rate reduction that ranges from 5 to 45 percent. CRS credit is provided for 18 creditable activities, organized under four categories: • Public Information • Mapping and Regulations • Flood Damage Reduction • Flood Preparedness The CRS is a voluntary program and is modeled after the fire insurance rating system. Insurance premiums are adjusted based on the rating of the community. Numerous watershed and floodplain management activities in Illinois and Lake County exceed the minimum NFIP requirements and therefore earn communities notable CRS credit. Mitigation Strategies 5-23 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 5-4 Lake County Flood Insurance Status Flood Flood Insurance Insurance Policies as Policies NFIP CRS of NFIP CRS as of CID Class Community 06/01/2011 CID Class Community 06/01/2011 170358 Village of Antioch 78 170378 5 Village of Lincolnshire 112 170359 Village of Bannockburn 3 170379 Village of Lindenhurst 11 170057 Village of Barrington 36 170380 Village of Long Grove 40 170058 Village of Barrington Hills 12 170381 Village of Mettawa 5 171022 Village of Beach Park 31 170382 Village of Mundelein 47 170068 Village of Buffalo Grove 64 170383 Village of North Barrington 18 170028 Village of Deer Park 5 170384 City of North Chicago 13 170361 6 Village of Deerfield 148 170385 Village of Old Mill Creek 170362 Village of Fox Lake 312 170386 City of Park City 30 Village of Fox River Grove 32 Village of Port Barrington 43 170363 Village of Grayslake 61 170387 Village of Riverwoods 89 170364 Village of Green Oaks 14 170388 Village of Round Lake 16 170365 X Village of Gurnee 117 170389 Village of Round Lake Beach 222 171005 Village of Hainesville 1 170390 Village of Round Lake Heights 6 170366 Village of Hawthorn Woods 14 170391 Village of Round Lake Park 18 170367 City of Highland Park 8 170392 Village of Third Lake 4 171033 City of Highwood -- 170393 Village of Tower Lakes 5 170369 SFHA Village of Indian Creek _ 170394 Village of Vernon Hills 23 170370 Village of Island Lake 36 171042 Village of Volo 1 170371 Village of Kildeer 17 170395 Village of Wadsworth 8 170372 Village of Lake Barrington 18 170396 Village of Wauconda 35 170373 Village of Lake Bluff 11 170397 City of Waukegan 77 170374 City of Lake Forest 67 170173 7 Village of Wheeling 808 170375 Village of Lake Villa 13 170398 Village of Winthrop Harbor 10 170376 Village of Lake Zurich 14 170399 City of Zion 10 170915 Village of Lakemoor 31 170357 7 Lake County 966 170377 Village of Libertyville 151 Table 5-4 shows the CRS class for Lake County and the Lake County municipalities that currently participate in the CRS. The CRS class rating and insurance premium reductions are shown in the table below. Properties in the FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), or the 100-year floodplain, receive a 5 percent premium reduction for every improvement in the CRS class. Properties outside the SFHA already have a reduced premium (since they are outside the floodplain), and therefore have a lower premium reduction than properties in the SFHA. Mitigation Strategies 5-24 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan CRS Premium Reduction Class Credit Points SFHA* Non-SFHA 1 4,500+ 4 5% 10% 2 4,000—4,499 40% 10% 3 3,500—3,999 35% 10% 4 3,000—3,499 30% 10% 5 2,500—2,999 25% 10% 6 2,000—2,499 20% 10% 7 1,500—1,999 15% 5% 8 1,000—1,499 10% 5% 9 500—999 5% 5% 10 0-499 0 0 *SFHA=Special Flood Hazard Area Credit points are then earned from the following categories, listed by activity number: Public Information Flood Damage Reduction 310 Elevation Certificates 510 Floodplain Management Planning 320 Map Information 520 Acquisition and Relocation 330 Outreach Projects 530 Retrofitting 340 Hazard Disclosure 540 Drainage System Maintenance 350 Flood Protection Library 360 Flood Protection Assistance Mapping and Regulations Flood Preparedness Activities 410 Additional Flood Data 610 Flood Warning Program 420 Open Space Regulation 620 Levee Safety 430 Higher Regulatory Standards 630 Dam Safety 440 Flood Data Maintenance 450 Stormwater Management I aselne t Backup Lnsurance: The NFIP will cover seepage and sewer backup for an additional deductible provided there is a general condition of flooding in the area that was the proximate cause of the basement getting wet. Several insurance companies offer coverage for damages incurred should a sump pump fail or sewer line back up. Most exclude damage from surface flooding that would be covered by the NFIP. Other Insurance: Insurance is also available for earthquakes other hazards such as sinkholes. Most of these coverages are included to a property policy as a policy rider. 5.2.5 Repetitive Flood Loss Properties Chapter 3 discusses the 68 Lake County and Lake County community repetitive loss properties (properties with two federal flood insurance claims of at least $1,000 in any ten year period). Protecting repetitive loss buildings is a priority with FEMA and IEMA mitigation funding programs. The factors listed below should be used to determine appropriate property protection measures for repetitive loss properties. The criteria used are based on several studies that have identified appropriate measures based on flood and building conditions. While a Mitigation Strategies 5-25 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan cost/benefit study was not conducted on each property, these guidelines show which measures are cost-effective. • "High hazard areas" are areas in the floodway or where the 100-year flood is two or more feet over the first floor. • Buildings in high hazard areas or in less than good condition should be acquired and demolished. • Buildings with basements and split-level foundations in high hazard areas should be acquired and demolished. They are too difficult to elevate and the hydrostatic pressures on the walls from deeper flooding make them too risky to protect in place. • Buildings subject to shallow flooding from local drainage should be protected through area-wide flood control or sewer improvement projects. • Buildings in good condition on crawlspaces should be elevated or relocated. • Buildings in good condition on slab, basement or split-level foundations subject to shallow flooding (less than 2 feet) can be protected by barriers and dry floodproofing. • Recent flood claims. Some properties have not had a flood insurance claim for 20 years, indicating that some measure has probably been put in place to protect the property from repetitive flooding. These criteria are general, and recommendations for individual structures should be made only after a site inspection. Other extenuating circumstances may also alter the recommendations. Lake County has used the above direction in the development of"flood audits" that have been performed in repetitive loss areas. Repetitive loss areas were first identified during the development of the 2004 Draft Lake County Flood Mitigation Plan (around 2000). Letters were sent to property owners within selected repetitive loss areas to determine their interest in having a flood audit done for their property. Combined, SMC and Gurnee have conducted over 400 flood audits. As discussed in Section 3.3 and shown in Table 3-15 and Exhibit 3-5 of Chapter 3 of this ANHMP, there are 86 properties on the Lake County repetitive loss list, located in 14 municipalities and unincorporated Lake County. The repetitive loss properties were grouped into 42 Repetitive Loss Areas (see Table 3-16). Eighteen repetitive loss properties have been properties mitigated or are included in a pending mitigation project (acquisition). Of the remaining 68 repetitive loss properties, 31 have had flood audits (see Table 3-17). A flood audit also means that SMC at one time coordinated with the property owners about the flood audit process and the potential for mitigation project funding. Thirty-seven(37)repetitive loss properties have not been audited, but a number of them are in areas that nearby properties were audited. All of the 37 properties are single family homes. Of the 31 audited properties, all but two are single family residential. Around 30 of the 68 unmitigated repetitive loss properties are located on or near major Lake County lakes. When flooding occurs on the Fox Chain of Lakes, the flooding lasts for weeks. Long flood periods can also be experienced for properties along the Des Plaines River. Mitigation Strategies 5-26 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan During the flood audit, the range of flood mitigation options presented in the ANHMP will be investigated. 5.2.6 Property Protection Recommendations 1. All buildings and critical facilities in the floodplain, SMC problem areas and depressional storage areas, with priority given to buildings or facilities in the floodway, should be mitigated, to the extent that the measures are cost effective and feasible. 2. Identified repetitive flood loss areas should be further investigated through flood audits, and flood prone structures should be mitigated. 3. SMC should continue to conduct flood audits and to pursue hazard mitigation grants for the acquisition of properties that are cost effective and have interested property owners. 4. Investigate property-owner incentives for elevations, barriers and floodproofing. 5. Establish and disseminate guidelines for local officials for determining what mitigation measures are appropriate to protect property for various circumstances for floods, severe storms, tornadoes and other priority hazards in Lake County. 6. Available property protection public education materials for all priority hazards should be consolidated and tailored for Lake County. Materials should address measures that can help owners reduce their exposure to damage by natural hazards and the various types of insurance coverage that are available. 7. Critical facilities should be audited to determine their vulnerability and hazard mitigation needs. 8. Mitigation projects should be pursued for vulnerable critical facilities, including public facilitates and health-care related facilities. Each public entity should protect its own publicly-owned facilities with appropriate mitigation measure(s), except where efficiencies allow for joint funding and joint projects. 9. The availability of tornado shelters or safe rooms in Lake County should be investigated. 10. Safe rooms should be constructed wherever needed in Lake County with priority given to schools and critical faculties. 11. Develop action plan to identify and remedy illicit hook ups and sewer infiltration that maps and prioritizes problem areas for remediation. This can be done as a county coordinated community program in conjunction with NPDES Phase 2 requirements. 12. Encourage business recovery plans. 13. Feasible mitigation projects should be funded through grants or through capital funding. 14. All property owners should be encouraged to determine if they are adequately insured for natural hazards. 15. Each public entity(county, community, schools and other agencies) should evaluate its own properties, with a priority given to critical facilities, to determine vulnerabilities to damage from natural hazards. Mitigation Strategies 5-27 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.3 Resource Protection Resource Protection Natural resource protection measures serve to restore or I Address: ➢ Floods preserve the natural functions of the floodplain and other ➢ Tornadoes components of the watershed storage and drainage system. ➢ Severe Storms These measures are implemented by a variety of public and ➢ Winter Storms private parties ranging from local park districts, forest ➢ Extreme Heat preserves and regulatory agencies to land developers and ➢ Dam Failure r farmers. Resource protection measures include activities ➢ Wildfire ➢ Erosion such as: ➢ Drought ➢ Groundwater • Open space preservation �ml mmm�mu • Wetland protection • Erosion and sediment control • Streambank restoration • Groundwater protection • Urban forestry • Historic and natural area protection Liberty Prairie Reserve The Liberty Prairie Reserve is located in the 5.3.1 Open Space Preservation area bordered by Routes 120 and 137 from f north to south, and Route 21 and Prairie Open space preservation throughout a watershed is Crossing on Route 45 from east to west.The important for a variety on natural hazard and Reserve is a unique example of open space preservation that is a combination of public environmental reasons. Preserving floodplains and and private ownership.Approximately 1,500 natural sites of water storage, such as wetlands and ?; acres of the 2,500 acre reserve is currently low-lying areas maintain the existing stormwater protected as open space.The natural storage capacities of an area. These sites can also landscape of the Reserve, combined with rs serve as recreational areas, greenway corridors, agricultural and residential land uses, has provide habitat for local flora and fauna, and improve been protected through both outright water quality. Open space may also be maintained as acquisition and conservation easements. a park, golf course, or in agricultural use. Upland areas within a watershed may be key to limiting runoff that will worsen flooding problems, important for water quality and groundwater recharge. Purchase of land is the most common approach to open space preservations; however, other methods can be considered in addition. Several more affordable examples of open space preservation practices include the purchase or dedication of an easement that limits use of the parcel in exchange for a tax abatement or as a condition of development approval, and the purchase of development rights for a property. Mitigation Strategies 5-28 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan In Lake County, the Forest Preserve District, local park districts and townships have prevented millions of dollars of flood damage through the foresighted acquisition of floodplain. The Lake County Forest Preserve District alone owns 6,784 acres of land , adjacent to the Des Plaines River, 1,052 acres along the ,,,�n '/ �O'''�'� Skokie Middle and West Forks of the North Branch of � t Chicago River, and 302 acres The Des Plaines River Trail is an excellent example of adjacent to the Fox River. floodplain open space that serves the entire community. Source: Lake County Forest Preserve District. Parks and golf courses follow ' the course of the Skokie River providing areas of floodplain storage. Private not-for-profit organizations are also active in preserving open space in Lake County. These groups include Lake Forest Openlands, Lake Bluff Openlands, Liberty Prairie Conservancy and the Lake County Land Conservancy. 5.3.2 Wetland Protection Regulations & Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Wetlands are usually found in floodplains or depressional areas. They provide numerous natural and beneficial functions that warrant protection. Exhibit 5-2 shows the open water b •� 9 and lake areas of Lake County wetland protection Wetlands along rivers and around the lakes is critical for water FOReduce large amounts of floodwater quality and ecosystem protection. downstream flood peaksce flood velocitiesWetlands located in the Waters of the U.S. (WOUS) ct shorelines from erosionare regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers water making it cleaner (Corps). Local wetland programs are important for roundwater recharge and scarge sites addressing gaps in the federal regulations, Provide habitat for species that particularly for smaller wetlands, unregulated J cannot live or breed anywhere else activities, and indirect hydrologic impacts. Local r wetland programs can require undisturbed buffers be ,mommmmmmmu omwamimmr� m� uuummmmmmm w maintained around wetlands. The WDO provides standards for the isolated wetlands no longer under the jurisdiction of the Corps. If your project may impact a wetland, you are required to submit a Jurisdictional Determination to determine if the wetland is an Isolated Waters of Lake County(IWLC) or a WOUS. Mitigation Strategies 5-29 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan As rain hits the ground, especially where there is bare soil as on farm fields and at construction sites, soil is picked up and washed downstream. This erosion of soil produces sediment that may end up in waterways far from the eroded area. Erosion also occurs along streambanks and shorelines as the volume and velocity of flow or wave action destabilize and wash away the soil. "'%�i ✓m u^ "�n1' " '� Sediment suspended in the water tends to W settle out where flowing water slows down. It can clog storm sewers, drain tiles, culverts and ditches and reduce the water transport and storage capacity of river and stream channels lakes and wetlands. - SMC, Corps and USDA-Natural , Resources Conservation Service have The impact of erosion from construction sites is intergovernmental agreements in place to controlled by straw bales and silt fences. Proper ensure proper and appropriate soil erosion emplacement and maintenance of these measures is and sediment control measures are vital to keep channels clear. installed and maintained on development sites. The three agencies meet quarterly to coordinate on potential site violations. BMP discussed in Section 5.1.3 of this Chapter are also important for wetland protection and erosion and sediment control. 5.3.3 Stream Restoration Stream Restoration Our understanding of the need for stream, streambank and Activities Address: riparian environment protection has grown significantly in ➢ Floods past decades. Eroding streambanks negatively impact our ➢ Severe Storms infrastructure (bridges and culvert blockages), impact ➢ Winter Storms property, and degrade the water quality. Terminology for ➢ Erosion G "stream restoration" can differ, but the objective is to return ry streams, streambanks and adjacent land to a more natural condition, including the natural meanders. Term such as ecological restoration encourage the restoration of native indigenous plants and animals to an area. A key component of these efforts is to use appropriate native plantings along the banks that Mitigation Strategies 5-30 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan T. ;' a ®� aarcw rr r r a s �� w I� 1 rer p "� III " p 2e areas"m�zr my nw, r w ew i� � ��'.�i` "*y�� •a�` �mt�dtl �.� �� ',, t c � - wr<.�,� F r �, o wwcea sraee �atrc gswarrw�m � s° r s;fie NNN M �`.�. �ias< am sze'ar"trraavrrr t+ i » gym" �,^ '^" g lw h w, mr "" as p�µa�I Poi m m 1 :�m" mm sta,trars,raa �r kmd ""III h rWY m �)7 flg,„m, 1 kw yd ✓,f f.;)A, �g A andPr 4W4, $4 ui D � f�1"" u a`v ROyp'kWD'tl.APY$,PA Xg�lY p G .� `�^M41�rry(�5 A/A� yry d a�A V rq �':� semro a�rtt. n u " 4 rwsre,w� rr� � W.,t`�„ "�^ 5a�° , n•'. I^ � 04 aara more � `� av ,� ✓ " wWL ` gym ^ a dj'mm �8 �' r � A uc" GaG 4utk 9RCG➢PS�, x ,0 a %kU au: Law rj p a ray<ata � r ' pu w w s A ° Ups v � t artx A"qw r r r YM s rnd r grw'elr,�8'rM m N a AIV:pA4,N PTIIN"1a 1® " C-m"�W ro r �t „� r uwara r "a �� jy s, b ra+uua t a c Of �a w, z�rdu 11 91, - ik s rw �.>y!»nrdar8tt s a '� rasa rawrt sa GR a LIIV NDYt ram rrtrs �s M y re t � � r�r�� a ` rtrttws�� r 1 s a d : c Aar �, wsaato sht Air w e rumo t°d � w rem e rncu ,ar a ti �s a rs ,rP tl'AOR' �;r�d � t�d vta&��,� ws .r a,'x dnrm"ruipr Vi"WNk�SrrrGn �"mdtiM"t lwr ". " r :a h wY ,'N�+'rtm ammm.m d �": g P,Awrrdduuw�k"e.�er Lake COUnly Fsocurrtle..._.. .,. Lake County , Illinois AD11)IVe"and^ LCWI Wetlands t CWJ ftefland� Open Mier ADID Wetlands Rivers and Streams Lk EM 43-"cxtrre a:vvayllnCers6ate Michigan ???. US Yaighymy ....,, ,.. -^--�State Highway _ 8l Read . ...............Major Rai! Exhibit 5-2 Lake County Wetlands Mitigation Strategies 5-31 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan resist erosion. This may involve retrofitting the shoreline with willow cuttings, wetland plants, and/or rolls of landscape material covered with a natural fabric that decomposes after the banks are stabilized with plant roots. In all, restoring the right vegetation to a stream has the following advantages: • Reduces the amount of sediment and pollutants entering the water • Enhances aquatic habitat by cooling water temperature • Provides food and shelter for both aquatic and terrestrial wildlife • Can reduce flood damage by slowing the velocity of water • Increases the beauty of the land and property value • Prevents property loss due to erosion • Provides recreational opportunities, such as hunting, fishing, and bird watching • Reduces long term maintenance costs The last bullet deserves special attention. Studies have shown that after establishing the right vegetation, long term maintenance costs are lower than if the banks were concrete. The Natural Resources Conservation Service estimates that over a ten year period, the combined costs of installation and maintenance of a natural landscape may be one-fifth of the cost for conventional landscape maintenance, e.g., mowing turf grass. It is worth noting that rivers will take the most efficient or shortest path as the waters flows downstream. Because of debris, scour and other factors, a stream might meander through an area. During a flood, though, the stream will attempt to straighten itself or adjust its course. This is a natural occurrence, but manmade influences on this cycle should be minimized. A, g Water Level High ......... Mean o Low -- --- �Erner I Emer Unman- Managed Crass gent gerit/l aged t�i� Tree � Buffer I, S�Ybmeried zone,l shrub zone Zone Zane aquatic zone zone zone 2 i 3 II 4 5 6 Aquatic and riparian buffer plant zones Different types of plants are used in different buffer zones along a channel.Zone 1 plants are normally submerged while zone 2 plants are inundated during much of the growing season.Zone 3 plants are water tolerant,but are flooded only during high water.By using the proper plants in each zone,they stabilize streambanks,filter polluted runoff,and provide habitat. Source: Banks and Buffers—A Guide to Selecting Native Plants for Streambanks and Shorelines,Tennessee U Valley Authority ��^ �u�mrem��o � mu��i� d� ii �i rr�mi wra�uiu�o nmmrtmmim�rmaz d mmsnr�nrrwww��wmrem�mmwwwmmmmrmaao�mwwwwraw,�m.. �wmmmu rcammmrommwr�mm mwmmmwar�rmmwwonrm�wmwwwwm �mear,��naumwwnww�w� �m�wurenw� Mitigation Strategies 5-32 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.3.4 Groundwater Protection Groundwater Protection Groundwater concerns in Lake County pertain to both Activities Address: groundwater quantity(or groundwater availability) and ➢ Drought '9 groundwater quality. The quantity of groundwater and ➢ Groundwater groundwater recharge depends on the ability of runoff to reach a pervious surface where it can become seepage. Urban runoff reaching a storm sewer, for example, which discharges into a stream, is effectively lost from the groundwater system. The quantity and the rate that water that seeps into the ground, and becomes stored groundwater, varies based on land use, soils, season, temperature, and more. The quality of the groundwater is influenced by a number of factors. Different types of ground cover, soils and aggregate layers have differing abilities to filter the infiltrating waters. Because of human activity, much of the rain or snow melt runoff that becomes seepage has many opportunities to collect pollutants. Pollutants need to be filtered back out either while the water is still above ground, or when it is seeping through the ground. Because soils and aggregate layers may not have the ability to fully"treat"the seepage before it becomes groundwater, it is essential to reduce the human-caused pollutants All groundwater was at one time surface water. Rain and snow melt seeps or infiltrates into the ground. Water that infuriates through the soil can eventually reach aquifers where groundwater is stored. Aquifers can be shallow, perched, deep, confined,unconfined, etc. Aquifer types and estimates of sizes can be mapped. Often the mapping of aquifer recharge areas is similar in shape and size as surface watershed boundary maps. MMa HIMENOMMMO 5.3.5 Urban Forestry Urban Forestry Activities Address: The majority of damage caused by wind, ice and snow storms ➢ Tornadoes is to trees. Downed trees and branches break utility lines and ➢ Severe Storms damage buildings, parked vehicles and anything else that was N ➢ Winter Storms ➢ Erosion under them. A forestry program(urban or rural) can reduce the damage potential of trees. Urban foresters or arborists can select hardier trees which can better withstand high wind and ice accumulation. Only trees that attain a height less than the utility lines should be allowed along the power and telephone line rights-of-way. By having stronger trees, programs of proper pruning, and on-going evaluation of the trees, communities can prevent serious damage to their tree population. A properly written and enforced urban forestry plan can reduce liability, alleviate the extent of fallen trees and limbs caused by wind and ice build-up, and provide guidance on repairs and pruning after a storm. Such a plan helps a community qualify to be a Tree City USA. To qualify as a Tree City USA community must meet four standards established by The Arbor Day Foundation and the National Association of State Foresters: 1. A Tree Board or Department 2. A Tree Care Ordinance Mitigation Strategies 5-33 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 3. A Community Forestry Program With an Annual Budget of at Least $2 Per Capita 4. An Arbor Day Observance and Proclamation The following Lake County communities participate in Tree City USA • Village of Antioch 0 Village of Libertyville • Village of Barrington 0 Village of Lincolnshire • Village of Buffalo Grove • Village of Lindenhurst • Village of Grayslake Village of North Barrington • Village of Gurnee Village of Round Lake • City of Highland Park Village of Third Lake • Village of Lake Bluff Village of Wauconda • City of Lake Forest Village of Wheeling • Village of Lake Zurich City of Zion 5.3.6 Historic and Natural Area Protection Lake County has over 90 homes, hotels, other buildings and districts included on the National Register of Historic Places. Additional sites are maintained by the Lake Forest/Lake Bluff Historical Society, the Fox Lake-Grant Township Historical Society, the Grayslake Historical Society and the Waukegan Historical Museum. The historic sites are vulnerable to hazards. It is difficult to protect the structures from hazards due to their historic nature,but it is important to consider should any mitigation opportunities be presented. There are also ten historic bridges in Lake County that are listed in the "Historic Bridges of the U.S." list as shown in Table 5-5. Table 5-5 Historic Bridges in Lake County .... _._.........._ .. _ .... ..._.�m Community and Crossing Year Year Road or Path mmmITITIT Brid e �e.:L Stat us Built Rehab. Hi hland Park-Ravine Bridges Central Avenue Concrete Arch-,Cen �_ ch Open to Traffic„ 1935 .......... Dean Avenue Bride IT Truss Open to Traffic 1928 1965 South Deere Park Drive www Arch Open to Traffic Lake Forest-Ravine Brid .n....n....A ._ges _ p to Blu g� el arch Pedestrians 1896 -- ffs Ed a Drive Ste„_mmIT 'mmITIT Lake Road ArchmmITm_IT� „Open to Traffic 1912_ 1978 Rin wood Road Arch _ Open to Traffic 1913 1995 Walden Lane 1 &2) Steel Arches Open to Traffic 1914 1995 Long^Grove-Buffalo Coffin Road Creek Cf gTruss E„Open to Traffic 1925 1981 Waukegan mm „ Waukegan-Waukn River Cro�ssin Genesee Street _ Three-span Arc Open to Traffic 1913 1984 Source: Bridgehunter.com Mitigation Strategies 5-34 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.3.7 Resource Protection Recommendations 1. Municipal comprehensive plans, land use plans and zoning ordinances should incorporate open space provisions that will protect properties from flooding and preserve wetlands, groundwater quality and recharge, and farmland. 2. An open space network should be designated and mapped based on the information collected in data layers for the area-wide conservation and development map. Soils, historic, archeological or cultural sites and recreation potential should also be added as considerations for designation of land in the open space network. 3. Communities should implement an urban forestry program that qualifies them to become a Tree City, USA. 4. The public and decision makers should be informed about the hazard mitigation benefits of restoring rivers, wetlands and other natural areas. 5. Better monitoring and enforcement of BMP performance. 6. Complete watershed assessments and plans that incorporate specific BMPs based on watershed condition for all 26 of Lake County's subwatersheds. 5.4 Emergency Services Emergency Service Activities Address: Emergency services measures protect people during and ➢ Floods after a flood. The primary responsibility for protecting lives ➢ Tornadoes and property from natural hazards lies with the local ➢ Severe Storms government. Lake County and many cities and villages have ➢ Winter Storms ➢ Extreme Heat emergency management offices to coordinate warning, ➢ Extreme Cold response, and recovery during a disaster. Lake County ➢ Dam Failure Emergency Management Agency(LCEMA) is operated ➢ Wildfire through the County Administrator's Office. At the state level, local emergency management programs are V coordinated by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA). In Illinois all counties and those communities with populations greater than 10,000 are required by law to have a state-accredited emergency services and disaster program. Municipal emergency management programs �r !l i' , ,° ,I ��r a' ii'f4�1/Dill!✓ ,�� f .��IUUWI respond to disaster situations that occur in their corporate boundaries. The LCEMA is responsible for all unincorporated areas in the county and incorporated communities that do not implement their own emergency management program. Emergency I management programs include activities such ,r as: Mitigation Strategies 5-35 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Emergency Planning Threat Recognition Warning # Response Recovery and Mitigation Critical Facility Protection 5.4.1 Emergency Planning An emergency operations plan (EOP) ensures that all response needs are addressed and that all response activities are appropriate for the expected threat. EOPs require frequent reviews to keep contact names and telephone numbers current and to make sure that supplies and equipment that will be needed are still available. EOPs should be critiqued and revised after disasters and exercises to take advantage of the lessons learned and changing conditions. The end result is a coordinated effort implemented by people who have experience working together so that available resources will be used in the most efficient manner. The LCEMA maintains and implements the County's EOP, and is responsible for the review of EOPs developed by the municipalities. LCEMA also facilitates emergency management exercises with the municipalities. Lake County has a Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) that meets quarterly. The LEPC has a number of County departments represented, several municipalities, the American Red Cross, heath care, area employers, and other members. All Lake County municipalities have emergency management personnel, and the majority of municipalities have either developed and adopted EOPs or are developing EOPs. All communities are working towards National Incident Management System (NIMS) compliance. Most communities have rooms that are converted into EOCs. Mutual aid agreements are in place throughout the county for fire, police, emergency management, public health, and public works. These agreements (MABAS, ILEAS, IPWIVIAN, IEMMAS, PHMAS) can be utilized in any phase of an emergency or disaster. 5.4.2 Threat Recognition The first step in responding to a flood, tornado, storm or other natural hazard is to know when weather conditions are such that an event could occur. With a proper and timely threat recognition system, adequate warnings can be disseminated. Effective threat recognition is key for emergency managers and local officials in order to protect life, health, safety and property from the impact of natural hazards. Floods: A complete flood threat recognition system measures rainfall, snow conditions, soil moisture, and stream flows upstream in order to calculate the time and height of the flood crest downstream. Mitigation Strategies 5-36 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The National Weather Service (NWS) tracks precipitation monitors river stages and issues flood crest forecasts during Des Plaines River i potential flood situations. rtG� q �wMarx�nra��z�r kar�iraN The NWS continuously in hi h"" relays weather information u, new r4unreil COMM ".rok7 z nrFnw�rr a&rnuv y:e iti 40 Mage r raeq� (Rs u i areas 6ws� through radio N,amm sul; &Ji V"�dGR Pr LE � wee" " transmissions, and flood wm� rrr forecasts are also available „�r r �.0 hly 19 111uJul 1 )W L U 2 kill bl kl 221_ M:db W V Ml;ltl via the Internet. A system of stream and ram gages 10JI1 N „ jointly operated by the u,. " � ® �:::.. .. ��'�"��w• � --° United States Geological Survey(USGS) and the SMC supplement that data available to the NWS. Table 5-6 shows NWS prediction locations for the Des Plaines and Fox Rivers. Stages are unique to a particular location and sometime difficult to relate to upstream or downstream locations. The creation of flood stage maps is one alternative to understanding a predicted flood stage and the extent of a flood inundation area. FRiver/Location e g9Table 5-s NwS Flood Forecast PointsFigure 5-1 Flood Forecast and Rain Action Flood and Stream Gage Links Sta a Staanes River [Illinois Del2artment of Natural Resources IDNR Russell 6.5 feet 7.0 feet http://dnr.state.il.us/owr/surveilance.htm + Gurnee 6.5 feet 7.0 feet 4 Lincolnshire 11.5 feet 12.5 feet National Weather Service tLWS' W .......� Des Plaines 4.5 feet 5.0 feet http://www.crh.noaa.gov/crh/ f Fox River United States Geolo lcal Service UISGS w Stratton L&D 3.5 feet 4.0 f http:/Iwaterdata.usgs.gov/il/nwis/rt 739 feet � Algonquin 2.5 feet 3.0 feet mmm" Tornadoes and Thunderstorms: The NWS is the prime agency for detecting meteorological threats, such as tornadoes and thunderstorms. Severe weather warnings are transmitted through the Illinois State Police's Law Enforcement Agencies Data System(LEADS) and through the NOAA Weather Radio System. For tornadoes and thunderstorms, local emergency managers can provide more site-specific and timely recognition by sending out NWS trained spotters to watch the skies when the NWS issues a watch or warning. Winter Storms: The NWS is again the prime agency for predicting winter storms. Severe snow storms can often be forecasted days in advance of the expected event, which allows Mitigation Strategies 5-37 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan time for warning and preparation. Though more difficult, the NWS can also forecast ice storms. Otter liazar ls: Lake County dispatch centers receive other severe weather alerts from the LEADS system. These alerts are issued by the Illinois State Police who monitor the NOAA Weather Wire, or through their monitoring of NOAA weather radios. Police and fire stations, schools, county and municipal buildings, and some private facilities have been issued Weather Radios, or they are notified over the EAS from the LCEMA. 5.4.3 Warning Earlier and accurate warning leads to better response. Most warning programs have two levels of notification: • A flood watch: conditions are right for flooding. • A flood warning: a flood has started or is expected to occur in the community. Warning notifications may be disseminated by the community in a variety of ways, including: • Outdoor warning sirens • Sirens on public safety vehicles • Commercial or public radio or TV stations • The Weather Channel • Cable TV emergency news inserts • Reverse 911 • Telephone trees/mass telephone notification • NOAA Weather Radio • Tone-activated receivers in key facilities • Door-to-door contact • Mobile public address systems • Cellular phone text messages • E-mail or social media notifications Multiple or redundant systems are most effective—if people do not hear one warning, they may still get the message from another part of the system. Just as important as issuing a warning is telling people what to do. Warning programs should have a public information aspect. For example, people need to know the difference between a tornado warning(when they should seek shelter in a basement) and a flood warning (when they should stay out of basements). Mitigation Strategies 5-38 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The Lake County Administrator is the officially designated Public Information Officer during an emergency. The Emergency Management Coordinator(EMC) assists him. The Lake County Sheriff's Office is responsible for operating a dispatch center. The dispatch center communicates with all county departments, and is responsible for disseminating warning information to the public and notifying key response personnel during an emergency. The County has its own radio network for emergencies called the Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Services (RACES)that maintains a school warning system and can also tie into hospitals and nursing homes in an emergency. Lake County schools, businesses and a number of County agencies have installed 156.210 Mhz warning radio receivers for early notification. If the situation warrants, the County Board Chairman, or his alternate, notify the EMC to activate the Emergency Alert System (EAS). The public warning system for natural and technological disasters includes the Outdoor Warning Siren Alert Tone. Outdoor warning sirens have been installed in a number of locations throughout the county. (Areas in the county where the outdoor warning sirens are insufficient have been identified by Emergency Services.) A number of the designated sirens can be activated manually at the siren site during a disaster. Community EMA coordinators, fire chiefs, mayors and police chiefs are authorized to activate these systems. The siren is a signal to the public to turn on televisions or radios to an emergency broadcast station where emergency public information and instructions on the type of protective actions that need to be taken are broadcast. There is also a Lake County Public Emergency Notification System(PENS) that uses tone activated police radios. In addition to the EAS and radio system,the EMC also passes flood warning information to affected communities and townships by telephone. The fire and police departments provide mobile sirens and public address systems, and door-to-door notifications when necessary. The EMC is responsible for notifying the IEMA Communications Center of all disaster warnings. StormReady: The NWS established the StormReady program to help local governments improve the timeliness and effectiveness of hazardous weather-related warnings for the public. To be officially StormReady, a community must: • Establish a 24-hour warning point and emergency operations center. a Have more than one way to receive severe weather warnings and forecasts and to alert the public. • Create a system that monitors weather conditions locally. • Promote the importance of public readiness through community seminars. • Develop a formal hazardous weather plan, which includes training severe weather spotters and holding emergency exercises. Mitigation Strategies 5-39 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Being designated as a StormReady community by the NWS is a good measure of a community's emergency warning program for weather hazards. Currently, no Lake County communities are part of the StormReady program. 5.4.4 Response The protection of life and property is the goal of effective emergency response. Concurrent with threat recognition and issuing warnings, a community should respond with actions that can prevent or reduce damage and injuries. Typical actions and responding parties include the following: • Activating the emergency operations center(emergency management) • Closing streets or bridges (police or public works) • Shutting off power to threatened areas (utility company) • Passing out sand and sandbags (public works) • Ordering an evacuation(chief elected official) • Holding children at school/releasing children from school (school district) • Opening evacuation shelters (Red Cross) • Monitoring water levels (engineering) • Security and other protection measures (police) Once a threat is recognized, the first priority is to alert others through the warning system. The second priority is to respond with actions that can prevent or reduce damage or injury. When resources at the local level and state level are insufficient to deal with a large scale flood emergency, assistance is available from the federal government. Response plans ensure that all response activities are appropriate for the expected hazard. The Lake County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) was updated in 2010. Table 5-7 identifies, as an example, the typical flood response assignments in Lake County. However the LPC feels that the EOP should be supplemented with emergency response teams for issues relating to the health department and mitigation opportunities. Mitigation Strategies 5-40 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Various county departments and agencies are responsible for maintaining their own emergency management procedures and response equipment. The EOP identifies and describes the activities of county departments and agencies responsible for event response. The LCEMA supports and coordinates municipal disaster response. As mentioned above, about 30 Lake County municipalities maintain and implement their own EOPs. Table 5-7 Lake County Flood Response Assignments Activating the emergency Lake County Emergency Management Agency(EMA)Coordinator operations center -coordinates emergency response of all county agencies. l Sandbagging certain areas EMA office provides bags and has Sandbagger machine, public works or township road department coordinate operations with citizen volunteers I a Maintaining highway system:storm => Lake County Division of Transportation(signs/marking, sewers,streets,bridges debris removal,storm sewer and drainage structure repair) Closing streets or bridges => Police/sheriffs department coordinated with appropriate road authority Protecting water supplies and => Department of Public Works wastewater treatment facilities Shutting off power to threatened Utility companies areas Releasing children from school => School districts Ordering an evacuation Lake County Board Chairman,Sheriffs Office,Mayor, s local police Opening evacuation shelters- EOC,Townships, Red Cross,Salvation Army, providing welfare services Lake County Chaplains,Catholic Charities r Guarding sandbag walls, Local police/Sheriff evacuated areas and other protection measures r 5.4.5 Critical Facility Protection A summary of Lake County critical facilities is presented in Chapter 1. Protecting critical facilities during a disaster is the responsibility of the facility owner or operator. However, if they are not prepared for an emergency, the rest of the community could be impacted. If a critical facility is damaged, workers and resources may be unnecessarily drawn away from other disaster response efforts. If such a facility is adequately prepared by the owner or operator, it will be better able to support the community's emergency response efforts. Protecting critical facilities during a hazard event is a vital part of any emergency service effort. If a critical facility is flooded, for example, workers and resources may be unnecessarily drawn away from protecting the rest of the community. If such a facility is prepared, it will be better able to support the community's flood response efforts. Most critical facilities have full-time professional managers or staff is responsible for the facility during a disaster. These people often have their own emergency response plans. State Mitigation Strategies 5-41 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan law requires hospitals, nursing homes, and other public health facilities to develop such plans. The LCEMA maintains lists of critical facilities in the County, but the information is not compiled for all critical facilities. It is the individual community or township's responsibility to plan for critical facility response within their jurisdiction. 5.4.6 Recovery and Mitigation Preventing dangers to health and safety is critical after a hazard event. Recovery plans should identify appropriate measures to take. Recovery plans also should identify which agencies will be responsible for carrying out these measures. Appropriate measures for protecting public health and safety include: Patrolling evacuated areas to prevent looting Providing safe drinking water Inspection of shelter food preparation and distribution facilities Inspection of food facilities prior to re-opening after flooding Insure adequate sanitary facilities for sheltered population Providing appropriate inoculations Clearing streets Cleaning up debris and garbage Regulating reconstruction to ensure that it meets all code requirements The EOP covers responsibilities for most of these measures. Within Lake County, the police, sheriff or reserves are responsible for protecting evacuated areas. Depending on road authority, the Tollway Authority, Illinois Department of Transportation(395 miles), Lake County Department of Transportation(270 miles) or the Township highway departments (530 miles) are responsible for clearing roads. A response and recovery checklist is included in the Highways Appendix of the EOP. The Lake County Health Department, in cooperation with the Public Works Department and the appropriate water treatment agencies (including JAWA), test the water supply throughout the emergency to insure it has not been contaminated. The Health Department is also responsible for inspection of food services,runs necessary inoculation programs, and will check private wells and septic systems that have been flooded within 14 days of request. The Public Health Appendix of the EOP includes a response and recovery checklist that covers all of these responsibilities excluding the checking of private wells and septic systems. The Lake County Red Cross is responsible for the operation of shelters. Mitigation Strategies 5-42 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan While the EOP is silent on the subject of flood clean up responsibilities, the LCEMA office supports community efforts at cleanup and debris removal from curbside (citizens are required to get the trash and debris to the curb). Appropriate post-disaster mitigation actions include, but are not limited to: • Conducting a public information effort to advise residents about mitigation measures they can incorporate into their reconstruction work • Evaluating damaged public facilities to identify mitigation measures that can be included during repairs • Acquiring substantially or repeatedly damaged properties from willing sellers • Planning for long-term mitigation activities • Applying for post-disaster mitigation funds 5.4.7 Emergency Services Recommendations 1. All communities should strive to obtain a StormReady designation. 2. Continue to update emergency operations plans for the County, and continue to develop municipal emergency operations plans with a NIMS compliant template. 3. Continue work for NIMS compliance for the County and all municipalities, and provide training on NIMS and Incident Command Structure (ICS) for all first responders and other identified personnel for compliance. 4. Improve information sharing between Lake County, municipal/township agencies and services providers, such as ComEd, during and after natural hazard events. Systems should be put in place to help ensure that response and recovery efforts are coordinating and well communicated. 5. Add a"Flood Annex" to the Lake County Emergency Operations Plan. 6. Establish an emergency response assessment teams, including a mitigation team and a health department team. 7. Response procedures for severe storm and high wind hazards should be incorporated in all emergency operations planning and response where appropriate. 8. Incorporate more proactive flood response activities in emergency plans. (i.e. identify and closely monitor known problem constrictions in drainage system; system of monitoring lake levels by lake associations for lakes with associated flood problem areas; guidance to property owners on when and how to turn off utilities during flood) 9. Standardize and improve system of flood damage reporting by the county, townships and municipalities in computerized database format. 10. The County and communities should ensure that alternative power sources are available at critical structures and shelters. Mitigation Strategies 5-43 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 11. Establish a"You Are Not Alone"program for seniors and the handicapped. 12. Install and maintain lightning detection systems for population and/or active sites. 13. Emergency operations centers at the County and in municipalities should be evaluated for effectiveness and functionality, and modified appropriately. The County and all municipalities should have a fully operational emergency operations center and a secondary location. 14. Conduct annual emergency response training exercises and table-top exercises. Look for multi jurisdiction training opportunities. 15. Develop a disaster recovery strategy for the County and municipalities that includes the identification of mitigation efforts. 16. Investigate adequacy and research funding opportunities for emergency warning and response equipment, including outdoor weather warning sirens, generators for critical facilities, and other warning systems. 17. Develop flood stage maps for the County's major streams to make use of gaging networks, warning systems and GIS mapping capabilities. 18. Research funding for additional rainfall and river gages. Also the County and community should look to expand the National Weather Service observer's network. 19. Continue use and funding of the County's Reverse-911 system and utilize other applications of that system for natural hazard warning and response. 20. Develop emergency transportation plans that allow for emergency coordination and evacuation (routing). 21. Maintain and update snow removal plans. 5.5 Structural Measures EMMU Structural projects are projects that are constructed to protect Regional Flood Control people, buildings and infrastructure from damage due to natural Activities Address: hazards. Preventingdamage due to flooding is the primary ➢ Floods g g p y ➢ Severe Storms focus of structural projects. Structural projects are usually ➢ Winter Storms funded by public agencies. Structural measures include ➢ Dam Failure activities such as: ➢ Erosion ➢ Sewer Backup • Watershed Planning • Regional Flood Control • Management Of Existing Dams • Improving Crossings/Roadways • Drainage And Storm Sewer Improvements Mitigation Strategies 5-44 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.5.1 Watershed Planning A watershed is an area of land draining to a river or stream. It includes rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands. Everyone lives in a watershed and everyone contributes to the health of the watershed. Communities are often time in more than one watershed. Exhibit 1-3 in Chapter 1 shows the Lake County watersheds. The major watersheds of Lake County are the Fox River Watershed, the Des Plaines River Watershed, the Lake Michigan Watershed and the North Branch of the Chicago River Watershed. In the 1970s and 1980s the watershed were studies by state and federal agencies (IDNR- OWR, the Corps and NRCS) for purposes of FEMA floodplain mapping and for purposes of identifying flood control projects to address existing flooding. Watershed studies are based on hydrologic (rainfall-runoff)models and hydraulic (extent and depth of flooding) models. As development has expanded throughout Lake County, these models have become less and less reliable for depicting full extent of the 100-year flood, for example. As funds become available, SMC has been remodeling watershed subbasins and developing watershed plans. Completed and underway watershed studies in Lake County include: 1. SMC and County Board Adopted Watershed Plans • Bull Creek/Bull's Brook Watershed-Based Plan(Des Plaines) (Adopted March 2009) • Fish Lake Drain Watershed-Based Plan(Fox River) (Adopted March 2009) • Indian Creek Watershed-Based Plan(Des Plaines River) (Adopted March 2009) • North Branch of the Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan (Chicago River) (Adopted May 2008) • Sequoit Creek Watershed Plan(Fox River) (Adopted July 2004) • Squaw Creek Watershed Plan (Fox River) (Adopted May 2004) 2. SMC Watershed Plans under Development • North Mill Creek/Dutch Gap Watershed-Based Plan (Des Plaines) (2012 adoption) • Dead River Watershed-Based Plan(Lake Michigan) • Kellogg Creek Watershed-Based Plan (Lake Michigan) • Newport Drain Watershed Plan(Des Plaines) 3. Other Watershed Plans Is Flint Creek Watershed-Based Plan(Fox River) • Waukegan River Watershed Plan(Lake Michigan) Watershed studies conducted in the 1970s and 1980s did not examine wetlands, critical environmental areas or water quality. Current watershed plans examine these issues as well as flood issues. A number of the watershed plans list homes that should be further examined Mitigation Strategies 5-45 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan for flood proofing. Other plans collected flooding questionnaire from residents within the projects. These efforts expand the database of SMC flood problem areas (shown in Exhibit 3-4 in Chapter 3), and adds to the list of properties that need a flood audit from the SMC. 5.5.2 Regional Flood Control Structural flood control measures are used to prevent floodwaters from reaching properties, thus preventing damage. These measures generally involve construction of man-made structures to control water flows. Because of their size and cost, structural projects typically are implemented with the help of state or federal flood control agencies such as the IDNR- OWR, the Corps, and the NRCS. Since structural flood control is generally the most expensive type of mitigation measure in terms of installation costs, maintenance requirements and environmental impacts, a thorough alternative assessment should be conducted before choosing a structural flood control measure. In some circumstances smaller structural flood control measures may be included in a package of several recommended measures for a project area where non-structural measures would not be practical or effective. Because larger structural flood control projects have regional or watershed-wide implications, they are often planned at a regional level by the state and federal agencies that provide the majority of project funding. Nonetheless, communities should participate in and coordinate with regional flood control studies to insure they are practical, effective and have community acceptance. Flood control studies have been done by federal and state agencies on the North Branch of the Chicago, Des Plaines and Fox Rivers. Some recommendations from these studies for reservoirs and levees have been constructed, others have not. Three flood control reservoirs have been Table 5-8 Flood Control Reservoirs North Branch Chicago River constructed in Lake County on the North t Branch of the Chicago River. Following Name Stream Year Built Cost Atkinson Road Middle Fork 1992 $5,557,000 study recommendations made by the Soil Duffy Lane West Fork 1990 7,980,000 Conservation Service (1974) and the Deerfield West Fork 1992 6,767,000 Corps (1988), the Duffy Lane Reservoir was constructed in 1990, and the Atkinson Road and Deerfield Reservoirs were completed in 1992. 5.5.3 Management of Existing Dams Management of Existing Dams IDNR-OWR manages the State's dam safety program that i, Address: requires dam permits and operations and maintenance Floods plans. The strictness of the permit requirements and plans Severe Storms ➢ Winter Storms ' is dependent on several factors including the level of Dam Failure hazard caused by dam failure, dam height and ` impoundment capacity. Mitigation Strategies 5-46 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan The primary determinant is dam hazard. Dams are rated as being either a high, intermediate, or low hazard depending on the damage risk for surrounding and downstream people and properties. As discussed in Section 3.9 in Chapter 3 of this ANHMP, there are 32 dams in Lake County under IDNR-OWR's jurisdiction. The Stratton Lock and Dam at McHenry in not included in the Lake County list,but is it of high concern to Lake County. In Lake County dams are largely managed and controlled by a municipality, lake or homeowners association, drainage district or private property owner. There is no county established inspection program or operations and maintenance requirement. The Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance (WDO) requires that the appropriate IDNR- OWR permit (or letter indicating that no permit is required)be received for all projects requiring a dam prior to the issuance of a WDO permit. 5.5.4 Improving Crossings and Roadways In some cases buildings may be elevated above floodwaters but access to the building is lost when floodwaters overtop local roadways, driveways, and culverts or ditches. Depending on the recurrence interval between floods, the availability of alternative access, and the level of need for access, it may be economically justifiable to elevate some roadways and improve crossing points. For example, if there is sufficient downstream channel capacity, a too small culvert that is serving as a constrictor creating backwater and causing localized flooding may be replaced with a larger culvert to eliminate flooding at the waterway crossing point. The potential for worsening adjacent or downstream flooding needs to be considered before implementing any crossing or roadway drainage improvements. 5.5.5 Drainage System Maintenance Drainage System The drainage system may include detention ponds, stream Maintenance Addresses: ➢ Floods channels, swales, ditches and culverts. Drainage system Floo I maintenance is an ongoing program to clean out blockages d ➢ Severe Storms ➢ Winter Storms caused by an accumulation of sediment or overgrowth of ➢ Erosion weedy, non-native vegetation or debris, and remediation of ➢ Sewer Backup streambank erosion sites. n� ro "Debris"refers to a wide range of blockage materials that may include tree limbs and branches that accumulate naturally, or large items of trash or lawn waste accidentally or intentionally dumped into channels, drainage swales or detention basins. In addition to sediment, debris and weedy vegetation removal, drainage maintenance can also involve using best management practices (BMPs)to stabilize eroding shorelines or streambanks. Maintenance of detention ponds may also require revegetation or repairs of the restrictor pipe,berm or overflow structure. Maintenance activities normally do not alter the shape of the channel or pond,but they do affect how well the drainage system can do its job. Mitigation Strategies 5-47 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan In Lake County, parks, public works or highway departments, the Forest Preserve District or the drainage districts where rights-of-way are established or easements have been granted generally perform channel maintenance activities. Channel maintenance and restoration have also been a part of several river/stream projects such as the pool/riffle installation of the Waukegan River restoration project, and streambank stabilization using bioengineering along sections of Flint Creek in Barrington and Lake Zurich and the West Fork of the North Branch of the Chicago River in Deerfield. In the case of detention ponds, generally a property owners association is responsible for maintenance at residential developments. Detention ponds on public properties are maintained by the appropriate government jurisdiction. Lake County allocated money for fiscal year 1998 to establish a drainage improvement fund for small projects in unincorporated Lake County. The Lake County Planning and Development Department (PB&D) is establishing the procedure for expenditure of these funds. In addition to this fund, Watershed Management Board (WMB) and Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funding have been used for drainage system improvements in the past. WMB funding is administered by the SMC and awarded on a competitive basis as 50% cost-share funding for projects sponsored by communities. CDBG fiends are administered by the PB&D based on recommendations by the Community Development Commission. There is currently no coordinated program or maintenance standards established at the county-level to consistently perform on-going drainage maintenance. Maintenance is typically done on an as-needed basis in response to problems or complaints about blockages or erosion. In many cases property owners must consent to the maintenance program. This may require legal negotiations to obtain maintenance easements. In Illinois, the responsibility for drainageway maintenance on private property, when no easements have been granted, is with the individual private property owner. This generally results in very little ym 7 maintenance being accomplished. The SMC developed"A Citizen's Guide for Riparian Area Management,"which educates landowners about debris removal and riparian landscaping. SMC anticipates adopting stream maintenance standards in the future to provide guidance and consistency for maintenance in Lake County. Mitigation Strategies 5-48 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.5.6 Structural Measure Recommendations 1. Develop, adopt and implement protocol for drainage system maintenance standards countywide (waterways, swales, detention basins, levees, reservoirs). 2. Study the feasibility of structural flood control projects within Lake County watersheds and pursue funding from IDNR-OWR and the Corps for feasible projects. 3. SMC and communities should investigate the need and ability to improve the capacity of drainage systems. 4. Communities should undertake steps to reduce inflow and infiltration into sewer system to reduce sewer backups. 5. Provide preventative maintenance for susceptible landslide areas. 5.6 Public Information If Public Information Mitigation of all natural hazards can be accomplished through Activities Address: effective public information activities. This is also true for ➢ Floods addressing health issues and pandemics. Public information P ➢ Tornadoes ➢activities advise property owners, renters, businesses, and local Severe Storms ➢ Winter Storms officials about hazards and ways to protect people and property. ➢ Extreme Heat These activities can motivate people to take the steps necessary ➢ Extreme Cold to protect themselves and others. A successful hazard mitigation ➢ Dam Failure program involves a public information strategy and involves ➢ Wildfire both the public and private sectors. Public information includes ➢ Erosion ➢ Sewer Backup activities such as: ➢ Drought ➢ Groundwater • Library and website resources • Outreach projects • Technical assistance property y ' p } y l measures, therefore, a Individualowners usually implement property �rot��ti�a�� community mitigation program should include measures to encourage and assist owners in protecting their property from flood damage. ` Public information activities advise property owners, and potential property owners, about 171 flood hazards and how to protect lives and � ` property from the hazards. � In addition to raising awareness about the hazards of flooding, public information activities also educate community residents and businesses about the beneficial functions local floodplains fl Jun ' provide. These activities are usually Mitigation Strategies 5-49 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan implemented by a public information office, but can also be the basis for developing a cooperative program with several different local agencies or departments. A community has passive and active ways to inform residents about flood hazards and damage mitigation. Passive ways to provide information include providing reference materials and map information in the public library, at government agency offices and on a web page. Active approaches include outreach projects and providing technical assistance. Four measures for a public outreach program are considered in this plan. 5.6.1 Library and Website Resources Community libraries are an obvious place for residents to seek information about flooding and flood protection. Maintaining and updating library resources with this information is an effective public information strategy, since most people turn to the library when they want to research a topic. In addition to maintaining a resource file, libraries also frequently sponsor their own public information campaigns that might include displays, lectures and newsletter articles. Arranging one of these types of activities with the library can support and augment county or municipal public information campaigns on flooding. In Lake County, information on flood awareness and response is currently available at the SMC LCEMA and other Lake County department websites, and at the American Red Cross office in Mundelein. SMC has developed and distributes a number I �� of brochures to other agencies and the public that address flood mitigation and response, and also serves as a clearinghouse for flood a �; information available from the state and federal government and other agencies. Examples of SMC publications include: There are many references on flood protection for property owners. 01 Guides for homeowners on riparian area management and maintenance of subdivision stormwater Best Management Practices; and A"who to call" list for drainage and flooding problems. SMC also maintains flood hazard information on its homepage through the Lake County website. The American Red Cross, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources Office of Water Resources also have print materials available in their office libraries. Mitigation Strategies 5-50 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.6.2 Outreach Projects In addition to supplying information in a passive manner through library resources, a community may want to engage in several more proactive approaches directed to those people at greatest risk. Proactive approaches reach out to people and give them information, even when they don't ask for it. Outreach projects are designed to encourage people to seek out more information on flood protection. They may include: • Mailing notices to floodprone property owners to introduce the idea of property protection; • Holding workshops, "open houses" or other special events; • Distribution of"how to"brochures, videos or handbooks to property owners associations, (or to individuals upon request); • Presentations at meetings of neighborhood groups; • Providing programs and information at public venues such as malls or fairs; and • Media blitzes, including newspaper articles, and radio and television news releases and interview shows, and Lake County TV cable channel. To be most effective, outreach projects should include information on property protection measures that homeowners can apply, and be locally designed and tailored to meet local conditions. The County sponsored its first official "Flood Awareness Week" in 1997. SMC organized weeklong activities that were co-sponsored by various County departments and agencies involved in flood hazard awareness and response. A day-long workshop was held for planners, realtors and insurance agents. Other events included an evening program for the general public that included several segments including an overview of the County's flood hazard; an introduction of all of the local players in flood response, flood protection and mitigation; and"where to go" or"who to call" for help. Flood awareness and safety messages and publications are permanently featured on SMC's website. 5.6.3 Technical Assistance In one-on-one sessions with property owners, community officials such as code enforcement staff or building inspectors can provide advice and information on identifying flood hazards at the site, correcting local drainage problems, floodproofing, dealing with contractors, and funding. More intensive assistance for highly flood prone properties may include conducting a"flood audit" that includes a written report covering remedial measures. Formal "flood audits" are currently not provided as a county service. Several county agencies advise residents on flood risk and flood protection. The SMC provides advice and technical assistance to property owners associations, municipal Mitigation Strategies 5-51 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan governments and other local government units for areas that experience flooding on a watershed or regional scale. The PB&D offers technical assistance to property owners in unincorporated Lake County that experience relatively minor drainage and flooding problems. Municipalities are responsible for providing this assistance within their jurisdictions, although not all have a system to do so, leaving some municipal residents without help. The appropriate municipal contact is generally the public works department. The Lake County Health Department provides technical guidance related to septic system failure and well contamination. Because flood events occur on an unpredicted and often infrequent basis, a good public information program is necessary for a successful flood Mitigation program. When flood mitigation measures involve multiple partners or property owners, the acceptance of a flood mitigation proposal may rely upon an educated partnership and public. A public information program is also necessary to make private property owners aware of the options available to protect themselves from future flood damage, and to convince them that flood mitigation is a good expenditure of their funds. 5.6.4 Public Information Recommendations 1. LCEMA, SMC and other county agencies should build a county-wide partnership for coordinated delivery of public information materials and activities. 2. Communities in the NFIP should provide floodplain information for property owners. 3. Develop and implement a system to coordinate the distribution of flood mitigation and response guidance materials for pre-flood outreach to at risk property owners. 4. Increase outreach to community plan departments and commissions to strengthen local understanding and review of development proposals and their compliance with WDO standards. 5. Educate property owners on safe rooms. Prepare informational material how to construct safe rooms in homes and other buildings. 6. Develop a method that helps identify safe rooms and encourages their use. 7. Education property owners and residents about safety during severe summer and winter storms. 8. Provide information to property owners and residents about safe use of generators and safe cooking during power outages. 9. Provide information that identifies location of cooling and warming shelters. Mitigation Strategies 5-52 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 5.7 Capability Assessment Summary Lake County and the municipalities have notable existing capabilities to minimize future vulnerabilities to hazards. Section 5.1 discusses the plans, ordinances, and programs that can help prevent or minimize possible future impacts of hazards. The WDO addressed new development, but also strives to mitigate the impact of existing development. Tables throughout this Chapter also summarize and highlight community activities, and other sections of this Chapter depict activities underway to address existing vulnerabilities. The Lake County government arrangement allows communities to take individual mitigation projects or to participate with the county. For example, communities can pursue their own buyouts, or they can participate with the SMC to address environmental and demolition/restoration needs. Municipalities have the choice of relying on the county for watershed development issues or making their own determinations through the WDO Certified Community approach. Communities have numerous mutual aid agreements, and LCEMA is working to reduce overall vulnerability. The constraints facing Lake County and the communities include both limited staff resources and funds that can be directed toward implementing hazard mitigation actions. To a great extent, communities will need to rely on technical and financial assistance from regional, state and federal resources to effectively implement hazard mitigation actions over the next five years. The current economy has severely limited funding throughout Lake County. During the development of this draft Hazard Mitigation Plan and after reviewing other recent planning initiatives, it is readily apparent that the municipalities have the capability to bring together citizens, government representatives, and local officials to work closely together in crafting a better future for their communities. That same cooperative effort, if joined with the appropriate technical and financial assistance from regional, state and federal resources, can be harnessed to implement the priority hazard mitigation actions described in Section 6 on this plan. A sustained effort by the citizens, staff, and local officials can create a more sustainable and disaster resistant future for Lake County. Mitigation Strategies 5-53 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Chapter 6 Action Plan. This chapter contains the 2012 ANHMP Action Plan. The action items presented in this Chapter were developed from the action items presented in the 2006 ANHMP, from the LPC meeting exercises and discussions, and the list of mitigation recommendations presented in Chapter 5. 6.1 Development of Current Action Plan The 2005 Planning Team identified high priority actions for the 2006 ANHMP (Section 6) and community specific action items in Appendix Q. All action items from the 2006 ANHMP were reviewed by the Local Planning Committee (LPC), including the communities-specific items. New action items were also discussed and all action items were reprioritized for the 2012 update. Three priority actions were highlighted in the 2006 ANHMP as high priority for the 5-year update (i.e., this 2012 update): Identify the number and type of existing structures, infrastructure and critical facilities at risk—Coordinator, Lake County Emergency Management Agency; Identify the number and type of future structures, infrastructure and critical facilities at risk—Coordinator, Lake County Emergency Management Agency; Identify the potential dollar losses from vulnerable hazards—Coordinator, Lake County Emergency Management Agency; These items were considered in this 2012 i update of the risk assessment in Chapter 3. All other high priority action items from 2006 are reviewed in Appendix C of this ANHMP. Appendix C presents a comparison of the 2006 action plan andT to current action plan. Action Items & Community-Specific Action Items: For this 2012 update, the � LPC discussed the effectiveness of the a action items in the former Section 6 and Appendix Q at the July LPC meeting and at the September 2011 public meeting. There was concurrence that with the countywide implementation of floodplain and stormwater management through the SMC, with the SMC's ability to implement watershed based or multi-community mitigation projects, and with the countywide efforts of the LCEMA, a comprehensive action plan should be Action Plan 6-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan developed. There was recognition that all communities involved in this ANHMP update share common municipal-level mitigation action items, with the exception of a few communities that are not subject to riverine flooding. Similar to the mitigation strategies presented in Chapter 5, all action items presented in this Chapter are available to all communities. Communities are not specifically identified for each particular strategy; it is expected that either through participation in a countywide effort or as a community, that the municipalities that participated in the ANHMP will strive to implement the applicable action items. For example, communities were not asked if they would join"Tree City USA" (Action Item 21), rather the communities all agreed that all Lake County communities should strive toward joining the program, as community resources become available. This severe storm and wind mitigation action item was highlighted in Lake County following the July 2011 straight-line wind event that took down a countless number of trees and left much of the county without power for days. As another example, the Village of Indian Creek does not have mapped Special Flood Hazard Areas and they do not participate in the NFIP; however, maintaining or improving their overall drainage system (Action Items13 and 14) is an applicable area of concern. Community representatives were asked to submit specific community action items, and these items were consolidated by the LPC in Section 6.2 of this ANHMP. Table 6-1 summarized County and or community responsibilities. Prioritization: Action items are prioritized within this Chapter in the order that they are presented. The prioritization was established based on the LPC discussion at the July 2011 meeting and other input from communities. The action items have been formulated around the priority hazards discussed in Chapter 3 and the goals and guidelines presented in the Chapter 4. In the 2006 ANHMP, action items were prioritized within each hazard; this was not done in this 2011 update. Prioritization was done with the recognition that mitigation actions can potentially address more than one hazard. Action item format: Action items assign responsibilities and deadlines to the appropriate agencies. Each action item contains a short description and a section for the responsible agency, the deadline for accomplishing the action item, the costs (and potential funding sources), and the benefits. Potential funding sources include the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs: the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program(HMGP), the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA). The action items are summarized in Table 6-1 and show the agency assignments. While this Chapter provides the action items in a priority order, any and all action items should be implemented if staff time and/or funding becomes available ahead of other action times. The relationship between the goals and guidelines are shown in Table 6-2. Please note, based on a hazard event, opportunity, property owner interest or available funding, the County or the communities may choose to implement a lower priority action prior over a higher priority action, or implement a recommendation included in Chapter 5 that is not included in this action plan. All mitigation opportunities should be considered. Action Plan 6-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 6.2 Lake County ANHMP Action Items Lake County and Lake County municipalities and other appropriate agencies will work to implement the following action items in the next five years as staff and funding resources allow: Action Item 1: Plan Adoption The County Board, City Councils, Boards of Trustees, and other governing boards, as appropriate, will adopt this Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan(ANHMP) update by resolution. Each agency resolutions should adopt the pertinent action items contained in this Chapter and in Appendix D of the ANHMP. Responsible Agency: County Board, City Councils, Village Boards, Boards of Trustees. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: 6 months. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: Adoption of the updated ANHMP ensures that County, municipalities, and other agencies are authorized to implement the action items with available resources. Plan Reference: Chapters 2 and 7. Action Item 2: Plan Monitoring and Maintenance A Lake County Local Planning Committee (LPC) meeting will be held at least once a year to evaluate and monitor progress on implementation of the ANHMP, and to organize for the next update of this ANHMP. An annual report should be submitted to the County Board by the LPC as an information item. Responsible Agency: Lake County Stormwater Management Commission(SMC) and Lake County Emergency Management Agency(LCEMA) and the LPC. Deadline: LPC to meet each year. A five-year update is required for FEMA's mitigation funding programs. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: A monitoring system helps ensure that responsible agencies continue to be aware of their assignments. The Plan should be evaluated in light of progress, changed conditions, and new opportunities. Action Plan 6-3 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Plan Reference: Chapters 2 and 7. Action Item 3: Improve Natural Hazards Public Information Efforts Education regarding natural hazards that can impact Lake County should be provided to all Lake County property owners and residents. A number of public information efforts have been implemented,but these efforts should be improved to more effectively reach people and to provide effective messages regarding life, health and safety and property protection. Public information and education efforts should focus on severe summer and winter storms, floods and tornadoes and materials should be developed specifically for Lake County and tailored to Lake County needs. Responsible Agency: LCEMA, SMC, LPC, Lake County Health Department(LCHD), LCDOT and municipalities. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: 2 years. Cost: Staff time and publication costs. Benefits: A county-based approach is the most cost effective approach and will offer the greatest benefit. Public information efforts can address nearly every natural hazard and more than one hazard can be discussed with an audience at one time. Plan Reference: Chapter 5. Action Item 4: SMC Flood Mitigation Projects Based on the findings in Chapter 3 of this ANHMP, it is important for the Lake County SMC to continue with their watershed management efforts for the purpose of flood mitigation in unincorporated Lake County and within the Lake County municipalities. The SMC should continue making use of their annual funding and available FEMA grant funding to provide flood mitigation. Based on the number of SMC flood problem areas identified(see Table 3- 13), the SMC recognized the Des Plaines River and the Fox River watersheds as priority areas. a. Priority actions for the Des Plaines River Watershed in the next five years include: o Floodplain buyout program, including the acquisition of the Gurnee Grade School in Gurnee and the residential property acquisitions in the Village of Lindenhurst with HMGP funds • Floodplain remapping/studies for Newport Creek, Indian Creek, Bull Creek and Mill Creek Action Plan 6-4 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan snrnmwwamwwr xmam �m �wum ... Watershed planning/coordination for Des Plaines River- Phase II, North Mill Creek,Newport Creek, Bull Creek and Indian Creek Involved communities: Antioch, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Green Oaks, Grayslake, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Indian Creek, Kildeer, Lake Forest, Lake Zurich, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Riverwoods, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Vernon Hills, Wadsworth, Wheeling, Zion b. Priority actions for the Fox River Watershed in the next five years include: • Floodplain buyout program • Floodplain remapping/studies for Fish Lake Drain, Sequoit Creek, Squaw Creek, and Round Lake Drain/Eagle Creek/Long Lake • Watershed planning/coordination for Fish Lake Drain Involved communities: Antioch, Barrington, Barrington Hills, Deer Park, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Island Lake, Lake Barrington, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Lindenhurst, Mundelein,North Barrington, Port Barrington, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Tower Lakes, Wauconda, Volo. c. Priority actions for the North Branch of the Chicago River Watershed in the next five years include: • Floodplain buyout program • Watershed planning/coordination for Skokie River • Flood response/damage assessments Involved communities: Bannockburn, Deerfield, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Highland Park, Highwood, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lincolnshire, Mettawa, Park City, North Chicago, Riverwoods, Waukegan. d. Priority actions for the Lake Michigan Watershed in the next five years include: • Floodplain buyout program • Floodplain remapping/studies for Kellogg Creek • Watershed planning/coordination for Dead Creek and Kellogg Creek • Flood response/damage assessments Involved communities: Beach Park, Highland Park, Highwood, Lake Forest, Lake Bluff, North Chicago, Wadsworth, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, Zion. e. Ongoing and anticipated efforts of the SMC in the next five years for all four major watersheds include: • Flood response/damage assessments • Local drainage project cost-share program Action Plan 6-5 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan • Rain gauge program • GIS mapping and countywide base flood elevation layer, LOMA/LOMRs • Implementation of Watershed Development Ordinance (WDO) Responsible Agency: SMC. Deadline: Based on SMC annual budget and available grant funding. Cost: Project specific. Benefits: All of Lake County benefits from the continuation of the SMC's countywide efforts for the protection of property, transportation, and health and safety during minor and major flood events. Plan Reference: Chapter 3, Section 3.3, and Chapter 5. Action Item 5: Development of Flood Stage Maps Flood stage maps should be developed to show varying depths of flooding and the respective area of inundation for floodplain areas within Lake County's major watersheds. The maps should be developed by watershed based on available hydrologic and hydraulic models. Flood stage maps can be used by all agencies to determine early protection actions. Responsible Agency: SMC, LCEMA, and GIS Division. Deadline: Based on available grant funding. Cost: Approximately, $100,000. Potential funding sources include HMGP, PDM, and FMA. Benefits: Flood stage mapping would provide a depiction of the most at-risk structures, intersections, and utilities in the floodplain. They would aid in mitigation project planning. Most importantly, they would provide data for emergency response (and response planning) and allow communities to assess and identify needed resources. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.4. Action Item 6: Property Protection Checklist A pre- and post-disaster checklist should be prepared for use by all agencies throughout the County for evaluating properties that are exposed to flood damage and severe storms. The checklist can be used to provide mitigation advice (before or after an event) and to assess damage. Responsible Agency: SMC, LCEMA, LPC, and NFIP coordinators. Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Identified per project. Benefits: Allows for the efficient collection of property information and a useful evaluation of alternatives that can lead to mitigation actions taken by property owners. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.2. iIWMIW9NNUID9rtMYWYWiIYAWIhA NA.W.MVNNp WVpWWWMWWWW W roMIW�fIMY'WHMXMWWIMNWWWWIWWY iWHWY tliW1VUWWu IXIPo'Jw'bh Action Plan 6-6 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Action Item 7: Improve Emergency Response and Develop Assessment Teams Lake County and the municipalities should work to improve emergency response and to develop assessment teams for emergency management response, health department concerns and needs and for post-disaster mitigation. If a community waits until a disaster occurs to plan post-disaster mitigation policies and procedures, they are too late. The time to prepare is before the disaster occurs. Preparation includes assigning post disaster tasks to: Determine the extent of the damages, including whether the structures are substantially damaged as defined in the WDO * Determine the health and safety needs Ensure that the public is aware of actions that they should be taking and that the community is taking to mitigate damages, as well as encouraging property owners and renters to work with their insurance agents to help cover their losses Ensuring that residents have the proper permits before repairing structures and ensuring that the repair is completed according to code Determine what mitigation actions are appropriate given the extent of damages Determine whether any temporary permit and construction moratoriums need to be put in place subsequent to the disaster Response teams should be developed through the LCEMA and other county agencies and the LPC. Individuals that may be needed for post disaster activities should be trained, should be aware of their potential assignments and should prepare documents that they may need to use after the disaster occurs. Responsible Agency: LCEMA, LCHD, SMC, Planning, Building and Development(PB&D), municipalities, and other agencies. Deadline: 18 months. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: This action ensures that the needs of the county can be addresses quickly after a hazard event and to pursue mitigation opportunities as the earliest possible time. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.4. Action Item 8: Incorporate ANHMP into Other County and Municipal Plans As noted in Table 5-2, Lake County communities have a variety of plans and ordinances in place. Actions identified in this ANHMP should be incorporated into comprehensive, stormwater management, capital improvement, land-use and emergency management plans, zoning ordinances,building codes, and post-disaster mitigation policies and procedures. Each jurisdiction participating in this ANHMP will be responsible for reviewing their plans, ordinances and policies and, as appropriate, revising those documents. Action Plan 6-7 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Each community that has adopted this mitigation plan will take the following actions to facilitate the incorporation of mitigation actions into their plans and ordinances: Within one year of the adoption of the ANHMP by the community, the lead individual for each community(emergency manager, public works director, engineer or planner)will lead a local committee that will complete an evaluation of the Villages Plans, Codes and Ordinances to determine those that need to be modified to incorporate the action items of the ANHMP. When the plans, codes or ordinances are updated or modified for any purpose, a recommendation will be made to make the modifications noted in number 1 above. Next time the ANHMP is updated or modified, a review will be completed within one year of adoption to determine if any additional modifications must be made to local plans, codes or ordinances. Responsible Agency: County Board, City Councils,Village Boards, Boards of Trustees, and County and municipal offices. Deadline: 5 years. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Cost: Staff time. Benefits: Adoption of the updated ANHMP ensures that County, municipalities, townships and other agencies are authorized to implement the action items with available resources. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.1. Action Item 9: Property Protection Projects Properties that are exposed to flood damage and severe storms throughout Lake County should be protected through property protection measures where regional structural projects are not feasible. Property protection measures should include,but not be limited to, acquisition, elevation, floodproofing, or retrofitting. Priority should be given to repetitive loss properties, but all flood prone properties (floodplain, depressional storage or SMC problem areas) including critical facilities should be included. Responsible Agency: SMC, municipal NFIP coordinators. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and NFIP municipalities, including (by watershed): Action Plan 6-8 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Des Plaines River: Antioch, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Kildeer, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein, Old Mill Creek, Riverwoods, Round Lake Beach, Third Lake, Vernon Hills, and Wadsworth Fox River: Antioch, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Hainesville , Hawthorn Woods, Island Lake, Lake Barrington, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor,North Barrington, Round Lake , Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Tower Lakes, Volo, and Wauconda North Branch Chicago River: Bannockburn, Deerfield, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Highland Park, Highwood, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest. Lincolnshire, Mettawa, North Chicago, Park City, Riverwoods, and Waukegan Lake Michigan: Beach Park, Highland Park, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest,North Chicago, Winthrop Harbor,Waukegan, and Zion Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Identified per project. Potential funding sources include HMGP, PDM, and FMA. Benefits: Properties will be protected from future flooding. Also the exposure of the NFIP will be reduced. There will also be a reduction in emergency response as structures are protected or removed from flood prone areas. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.2. Action Item 10: Continue to Map Natural Hazard Impacts and Continue Vulnerability Assessments Lake County should continue to identify the number and type of existing structures, infrastructure and critical facilities at risk to natural hazards and to map available data and information. Also, the potential dollar losses from vulnerable hazards should be assessed and used to evaluate potential hazard mitigation projects. Responsible Agency: SMC and LCEMA. Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: This will ensure that Lake County takes a consistent approach to hazard mitigation, and develops other plans with the protection of life, health, safety, business and property in mind. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.1 and 5.4. Action Item 11: Review of Critical Facilities and Implementation of Appropriate Mitigation Measures Critical facilities should be evaluated to determine their vulnerability to tornadoes, severe storms and floods. The availability of safe rooms and sheltering should be reviewed. Critical facilities have been mapped in the County's GIS. As the County further examines building footprints and floodplains as part of the stormwater management program, the Action Plan 6-9 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan review of critical facilities should be included. Approximately 20 Lake County critical facilities are located in the floodplain, and other critical facilities are vulnerable to wind and severe storms. Where necessary, critical facilities should be mitigated and protected from identified natural hazards. Responsible Agency: SMC, LCEMA, GIS Division, municipalities, critical facility owners. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington, North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: 24 months. Cost: Staff time. Potential funding sources include HMGP, PDM, and FMA. Benefits: Critical facilities that can function during hazard events allow for better protection of people and property. Shelters and safe rooms save lives. Review and mitigation of critical facilities will benefit Lake County through preparedness, response and recovery. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.2 and 5.4. Action Item 12: Seek Mitigation Grant Funding for Additional Mitigation Planning and Cost Beneficial Projects The County, municipalities, other agencies and institutions should apply for mitigation grant funding through available IEMA and FEMA programs for mitigation planning and mitigation projects. As required by IEMA and FEMA programs, projects must be cost beneficial. FEMA hazard mitigation funding including PDM, HMGP, FMA and Section 406 of the Stafford Act(for facilities and infrastructure damaged due to a presidentially declared disaster) should be considered. Responsible Agency: Lake County, municipalities, other agencies, and institutions. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL interested municipalities. Deadline: As needed. Cost: 25% of plan or project cost(non-federal share). Potential funding sources include HMGP, PDM, and FMA. Benefits: The County, municipalities, townships, other agencies and institutions, along with residents and property owners, would benefit from the available grant funding. The request for grant funding also allows the LPC to benefit from the mitigation planning effort. Plan Reference: Chapter 5 Action Item 13: Continued Implementation of the WDO and NFIP Requirements Action Plan � � � 6-10 � June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Lake County and municipalities, whether certified or non-certified, should continue to fully implement and enforce the Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance (WDO) for all applicable developments. The WDO incorporates the NFIP minimum standards, and while the PB&D administers the WDO for unincorporated Lake County, all NFIP municipalities are still ultimately responsible for ensuring that development within the regulatory floodplain meets the NFIP minimum standards. Responsible Agency: SMC, PB&D, and municipal NFIP coordinators. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL NFIP and non-NFIP municipalities Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: Community compliance with the NFIP is essential. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.1. Action Item 14: Improve Capacity of Drainage Systems When opportunities arise and when downstream areas are not adversely impacted(or mitigated), communities should strive to increase the capacity of drainage systems. Drainage improvements may include opening up restrictive culverts or bridges, storm sewer improvements, etc. Responsible Agency: SMC, LCDOT, municipal public works and engineering. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Staff time and project-specific costs. Benefits: Local flooding outside of the floodplam and riverine (floodplain) flooding can be reduced. Action Plan 6-11 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.5. Action Item 15: Implement Maintenance Programs for Drainage Systems,Including Streambank Stabilization Efforts The County, municipalities, and townships should develop and implement formal and regular drainage system maintenance programs. This effort should include the inspection of privately maintained drainage facilities. It is understood that each municipality and township will make these considerations based on available staffing and financial resources. Both urban and rural streams are in need of maintenance Also,bridges and culverts (active or abandoned)that restrict flood flows should be evaluated. The removal or enlargement of stream crossings, in cases were a modification will not cause an increase in downstream flooding, should be considered and funded. Streambank and shoreline stabilization efforts should also be evaluated and implemented. Public information should be provided to property owners on how best to protect streambanks and shorelines. Responsible Agency: Lake County, municipalities and townships. This can include public works departments, township road districts, or other appropriate departments or offices. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth,Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: 36 months. Cost: Staff time and equipment. Benefits: Development and agriculture have lead to a reduction of stream capacity, and upstream flooding as a result may be increasing. A restoration of stream capacity may mitigate upstream damage, and enhance stream and water quality. Regular maintenance can protect both structures and property. Regular maintenance can also be more cost effective than major maintenance efforts that are done on an as-needed basis. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.5. Action Item 16: Response and Recovery Information Sharing and Collaboration Improve information sharing between Lake County, municipal/township agencies and services providers, such as ComEd, during and after natural hazard events. Systems should be put in place to help ensure that response and recovery efforts are coordinating. Responsible Agency: LCEMA, municipal EMAs, utility companies. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Action Plan 6-12 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Lakemoor, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington, North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: Regular maintenance of streams, drainage ways and stormwater Best Management Practices will help reduce localized flooding problems. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.4. Action Item 17: Continue Work for NIMS Compliance The county and all municipalities should ensure that they are NIMS compliant. Training opportunities for all first responders and other identified personnel on NIMS and ICS should be shared will all agencies. Responsible Agency: County Board, City Councils, Village Boards, Boards of Trustees, County and municipal offices. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: All officials trained in NIMS allows for better hazard preparedness, response and recovery. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.4. Action Item 18: Alternate Power Sources for Critical Facilities and Shelters The July 2011 storms in Lake County highlighted the need for alternate power sources at critical facilities. The LPC recognizes that FEMA mitigation funds are not available for this action item,but recognizes the importance of all agencies and facility and shelter owners determining back-up power source needs and obtaining equipment and/or service. Responsible Agency: Emergency management agencies and facility and shelter owners. Action Plan 6-13 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: 36 months. Cost: Variable. Benefits: Adoption of the updated ANHMP ensures that County, municipalities, townships and other agencies are authorized to implement the action items with available resources. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.4. Action Item 19: Improve Building Codes and Building Code Enforcement Communities that have not adopted the International Code series of building codes should do so, and for all communities, future code revisions should be pursued to strengthen new buildings against damage by high winds, tornadoes, hail, earthquakes, and flooding. The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) program is designed to evaluate the code adoption and enforcement efforts of a community,with particular emphasis on natural hazard mitigation. The County and most municipalities participate in BCEGS and communities should strive to improve their rating to a 4/4, if not already attained. Requiring tornado "safe rooms" in certain structures should be considered. The floodplain provisions (design flood elevation) should also be considered in conjunction with the Lake County WDO. Training should be developed and conducted for building department staff on building code administration, enforcement, the natural hazards aspects of the International Codes, regulation of mobile home installation, flood provisions, and any other provisions applicable to hazard mitigation. Responsible Agency: County and municipal building code departments. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, and Zion). Deadline: Ongoing. Action Plan 6-14 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Cost: Staff time and cost of training. Benefits: Effective implementation and enforcement of building codes provides mitigation for severe summer and winter storms, including wind events, floods and earthquakes. Through rigorous enforcement of the latest available codes,utilizing adequately staffed and trained code enforcement professionals; these efforts will be reflected through more favorable BCEGS classifications. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.1. Action Item 20: Community Rating System Participation Municipalities that participate in the NFIP should consider participating in the Community Rating System (CRS). Lake County and a number of communities already participate in CRS, and they should also continue their participation. Responsible Agency: Municipal NFIP administrators. Community Specific Action Item for Continued Participation: Lake County, Deerfield, Gurnee, Lincolnshire, and Riverwoods. Community Specific Action Item for Communities to Consider: Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, Zion. Deadline: Ongoing. Cost: Staff time. Benefits: The CRS program saves property owners money on flood insurance premiums and it has been shown to be effective for both comprehensive watershed management and emergency response planning. Lake County and the municipalities enforce higher regulatory standards than FEMA and participate in many creditable CRS activities. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.2. Action Item 21: Reduce Inflow and Infiltration to Protect Against Sewer Backups Municipalities should evaluate options and implement programs to reduce the inflow and infiltration of stormwater into the sanitary sewer system to reduce the waste water treatment plant flow during severe storm and flood events. Efforts can be undertaken on a regional basis. Responsible Agency: Municipalities. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL interested municipalities. Deadline: 36 months. Action Plan 6-15 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Cost: Staff time and equipment. Benefits: When inflow and infiltration is reduced, the risk of sewage overflows or untreated discharge into the Lake County river system are avoided. Also, sewer backups can be avoided and damage to buildings can be reduced. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.2 and 5.5. Action Item 22: Urban Forestry- Participation in Tree City USA Lake County municipalities that are Tree City USA communities will maintain their status in the nationwide program, and communities that are not in the program will consider joining the program. It is understood that each municipality will make these considerations based on available staffing and financial resources. Responsible Agency: Public works department or other appropriate municipal department. Community Specific Action Item for Continued Participation: Antioch, Buffalo Grove, Grayslake, Gurnee, Highland Park, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, North Barrington,North Chicago, Round Lake, Third Lake, Wauconda, and Zion. Community Specific Action Item for Communities to Consider: Bannockburn, Beach Park, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Green Oaks, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highwood, Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Long Grove, Lakemoor, Mettawa, Mundelein, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth, Waukegan, and Winthrop Harbor. Deadline: 24 months. Cost: $2 per capita, staff time. Benefits: Urban forestry programs provide mitigation against severe winter and summer storms, and high wind events. The loss of trees is prevented along with the protection of power, telephone and cable services. Damage to vehicles and buildings from falling limbs is also prevented. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.3. Action Item 23: Participation in StormReady Lake County communities, other agencies, and colleges should consider joining the National Weather Service's StormReady program. The StormReady program has been developed to provide communities guidelines to improve the timeliness and effectiveness of hazardous weather-related warnings for the public. Responsible Agency: LCEMA, municipal EMA, police and fire, other agencies, and institutional emergency managers. Community Specific Action Item for: Lake County and ALL municipalities (Antioch, Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove, Deer Park, Deerfield, Fox Lake, Fox River Grove, Grayslake, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Action Plan 6-16 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Indian Creek, Island Lake, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Lakemoor, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Mettawa, Mundelein,North Barrington,North Chicago, Old Mill Creek, Park City, Port Barrington, Riverwoods, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Tower Lakes, Vernon Hills, Volo, Wadsworth,Wauconda, Waukegan, Winthrop Harbor, Zion). Deadline: 24 months. Cost: Staff time, and equipment purchases for some communities. Benefits: By meeting StormReady requirements, the County, communities and institutions will be better able to detect impending weather hazards and disseminate warnings as quickly as possible. Given the County's population, all efforts to prevent injury, save lives, and protect property are of high value. Plan Reference: Chapter 5, Section 5.4. 6.3 Implementation Strategy It is the goal of Lake County,the participating municipalities and the LPC to pursue the action items listed in this Chapter. However, as mentioned in Section 6.1, the other recommendations included in the ANHMP (i.e., in Chapter 5) are no less important and should be implemented as opportunities arise. Specific communities and/or neighborhoods are not identified with the action items. This was intentional to ensure that all mitigation efforts with private property owners are indeed voluntary and not perceived as dictated. A number of the action items are best pursued as countywide efforts. Those action items are noted in Table 6-1. Also, the LPC should continue to build partnerships and explore opportunities to leverage funds among state, federal, local, and private sources. "Stakeholders" in Table 6-1 refers to other local, regional, state or federal agency, and/or the American Red Cross or the Lake County Forest Preserve District. Plan monitoring and maintenance are discussed in Chapter 7 of this ANHMP. Action Plan 6-17 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 6-1 Summary of 2012 ANHMP Hazard Mitigation Action Items Action Item To Be Im lem p ented By: Lake Lake Lake Lake Municipal County County County County Boards& Municipal Other Action Item: Board SMC EMA PB&D Councils Staff Stakeholders 1. Plan Adoption ✓ ✓ 2. Plan Monitoring and Maintenance ✓ ✓ ✓ 3. Improve _. _. Natural Hazards Public ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ �/ Information Efforts —.—... ..... 4.SMC Flood Mitigation Projects ✓ ✓ 5.Development of Flood Stage Maps ✓ ✓ 6. Property Protection Checklist ✓ ✓ 7. Improve Emergency Response and ✓ ✓ ✓ Develop Assessment Teams 8. Incorporate ANHMP into Other C ._....� ounty ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ and Municipal Plans 9. Property Protection Projects ✓ ✓ `� `� .......... _...... 10. Continue to map natural hazard impacts and continue vulnerability ✓ ✓ assessments Review11. and Mitigation of Critical ✓ ✓ ✓ Facilities 12. Seek Mitigation Grant Funding for Additional Mitigation Planning and Cost ✓ ✓ Beneficial Projects 13.Continued Implementation of the Vol VI ✓ WDO and NFIP Requirements 14. Improve Capacity of Drainage ✓ ✓ Systems ........ 15 Implement Maintenance Programs for ✓ ✓ Drainage Systems 16. Improve Response&Recovery ✓ ✓ ✓ V/ Information Sharing and Collaboration 17. Continue Work for NIMS Compliance ✓ ✓ ✓ `/ 18. Alternate Power Sources for Criticalmm ..... . Facilities and Shelters 19. Improve Building Codes and Building ✓ ✓ Code Enforcement 20. Community Rating System ✓ V/ Participation 1. Reduce Inflow and Infiltration to ✓ Protect Against Sewer Backups 22. Urban Forest Participation m T _......_ Forestry- p Tree ✓ City USA __...�. 23. Participation in Storm Ready ✓ `/ Action Plan 6-18 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Table 6-2 Summary of 2012 Action Items and ANHMP Goals ANHMP Goals Chapter 4 Goal1. Goal2. Goal3: Goal4. Goal5. Protect the Protect public Mitigate Ensure that Mitigate to lives,health, services, existing new protect and safety of utilities and buildings developments against people critical do not create economic and facilities new transportation exposures losses Action Item: 1. Plan Adoption ✓ ........ ✓ �............�.. _ ... ✓ ✓ 2. Plan Monitoring and Maintenance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ `� 3. Improve Natural Hazards Public ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Vol Information Efforts _. ............. 4.SMC Flood Mitigation Projects ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ _...... ...� ..... ......... 5.Development of Flood Stage Maps ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 6. Property Protection Checklist ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 7. Improve Emergency Response ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ and Develop Assessment Teams 8. Incorporate.. _._ _......... � .._.�_ �. ....� _..._.� ANHMP into Other ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ County and Municipal Plans 9. Property Protection Projects ✓ ✓ ✓ `� 10. Continue to map natural hazard impacts and continue vulnerability ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ assessments 11. Review and Mitigation of Critical ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Facilities 12. Seek Mitigation Grant Funding for Additional Mitigation Planning and ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Cost Beneficial Projects ...... _.w_. 13.Continued Implementation of the ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ WDO and NFIP Requirements 14. Improve Capacity of Drainage _. ._ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Systems 15 Implement Maintenance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Programs for Drainage Systems 16. Improve Response&RecoveryInformation Sharing and mmmIT - ....� _... ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Collaboration ..... _.. ..a.. 17. Continue Work f...��_..._. ... or NIMS ✓ Vol ✓ ✓ Compliance 18. Alternate Power Sources for Vol ✓ ✓ Critical Facilities and Shelters 19. Improve Building Codes and ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Building Code Enforcement 20. Community Ra ting System ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Participation 21. Reduce In_ ......._. ........_... � .._... ......� flow and Infiltration to ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Protect Against Sewer Backups 22. Urban Forestry-Participation in ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Tree City USA 23. Participation in -ti Storm Ready ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Action Plan 6-19 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Chapter 7 Plan Maintenance As discussed in Chapter 2, the Lake County Local Planning Committee (LPC)was created following the development of the 2006 ANHMP for the purpose of plan monitoring and maintenance. The membership of the LPC included representative from the participating communities. The LPC met annually and published annual meeting reports that were posted on the SMC and County websites. The LPC meetings and reports proved useful in the development of the ANHMP and the LPC efforts fostered mitigation in Lake County. The LPC is coordinated by the SMC and the LCEMA. For this update, all communities were invited to participate with the LPC. Communities were asked to pass resolutions of participation and to appoint a community representative. 7.1 Plan Adoption Action Item 1 calls for all communities to adopt the 2012 ANHMP by resolution of the governing body within 6 months of the Lake County Boards adoption of this update. Adoption of the Plan ensures that County, municipalities, and other agencies are authorized to implement the action items with available resources. Adoption is also a requirement for recognition of the Plan by mitigation funding programs, including the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, the FEMA Flood Mitigation Assistance Program and the National Flood Insurance Program's Community Rating System. 7.2 Maintenance and Monitoring Maintenance and monitoring of the Lake County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan are addressed in Action Item 2. This action item explains how and when this ANHMP will be reviewed, revised, and updated. The LPC will continue to meet at least annually to discuss implementation of this ANHMP: • Act as a forum for hazard mitigation issues • Disseminate hazard mitigation ideas and activities to all participants • Allow for continued public participation in the implementation and future revisions • Ensure incorporation of ANHMP's goals and guidelines into other planning documents • Investigate mitigation opportunities • Report on progress and recommended changes to the County Board and each municipality Reports on progress should be both submitted (in writing)to SMC and LCEMA, and also presented and discussed at the annual LPC meeting. The annual reports will facilitate the 5- year ANHMP update. Plan Maintenance 7-1 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Mitigation plans are required by FEMA to be updated every five years (44 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 201). Mitigation plans may be updated sooner if any substantial revisions are recommended to the Action Plan in any year. If substantial revisions are by the LPC to the ANHMP, then the plan must be re-adopted by the county and the participating communities. As with the 2006 ANHMP, the 2012 ANHMP will be updated within 5 years of FEMA's final approval. Final FEMA approval comes in the form of a letter that is issued once a community submits IEMA and FEMA a copy of their adoption resolution. 7.3 Continued Public Participation Public participation for the 2012 update of the ANHMP included print articles, printed and online surveys, LPC meetings open to the public and a public meeting. Comments on the planning process and the draft ANHMP were encouraged and welcome. The adopted ANHMP will be posted on the SMC website and links to exhibits (maps) included in the ANHMP will also be available. This will allow the public to view the maps at a better scale and more closely examine their community and their property. Public input and participation will be welcome at the LPC annual meetings. Other public information materials will be posted on the SMC and LCEMA websites and provided to the municipalities for website postings or print materials. Also, a public meeting will precede any amendments or updates to the plan. 7.4 Evaluating the Plan's Success Evaluation of the ANHMP will not only include checking whether mitigation actions are implemented or not, but also assess their degree of effectiveness and assess whether other hazards need to be addressed. This will be accomplished by reviewing the qualitative benefits (or avoided losses) of the mitigation activities, to the extent possible. These findings will be compared with the mitigation goals the plan sets out to achieve. The LPC will also evaluate whether mitigation actions need to be discontinued, or modified in any way in light of new developments in the community. The progress will be documented by the LPC and submitted to the County Board and municipal councils on an annual basis. Plan Maintenance 7-2 June 2012 Appendix A Participation �.... _. _.............._ _ ..... . _.. m ..... _ ,..�. _.. ... ro_ .�. � ...__... . ..., Community Name Title Village of Antioch Lee Shannon EMA Coordinator Village of Bannockburn Maria Lasday Administrator ... _...... _.... ......�.__.._..� Village of Beach Park Chet Splitt EMA Coordinator Village of Beach Park Tracy Miracle Administrative Coordinator Village of Buffalo Grove GregBo sen Dir.,Public mm __ . y Works Village of Deer Park Todd Gordon GHA/Village Engineer....... Village of Deerfield ^ Barbara Little ............ Dir.,Public Works orks : Village of Fox LakemmITITITITIT Frank Urbine EO Vill age e of Fox Lake Annette Wolf EMA Coordinator lag Village of Fox Rive......._.__ . .Zi _ ...... River...... Tim Zintl Asst.Public Works Supt. ...................m .................... Village of Grayslake Kurt Baumann EO ........ . ...... Village of Green Oaks Elaine Palmer Administrator Village of Gurnee Dave Ziegler g _ mmmmmITIT� EO ITYYYITIT� v_ ........... Village of Hainesville All Maiden RCCA/Planner ........... Village of Hawthorn Woods ... ITITITITIT Pam Newton _. uW Chief Operating Officer ........... .. ...... City of Highland Park Mary Anderson Dir.,Public Works ............ Village of Indian Creek Represented by County a of Island Lake Connie.M..... .......... _.. Village ascillino EMA Coordinator ... Village of Kildeer Mike Talbett Administ rator Village of Lakemoor* David Alarcon Administrator mmm .... �Village of Lake Barrington .... .. Chris Martin Administrator Village of Lake Bluff Brandon Stanick Asst.Administrator City of Lake Forest WXmmmmmmmmITITIT Kevin Issel Deputy Fire Chief Villa a of Lake Villa Bud Osmommm g nd EMA Coordinator Village of L..... ....u__.........._. ___.. ...�..�. .............� ake Zurich Kurt Kaszuba EO Village of Libertyville Rich Carani Fire Chief Villaof ................... _......... _... ............. Village Lincolnshire Jennifer Hughes Dir.,Public Works Village of Lindenhurst Wes Welch Dir.,Public Works Village of Long Grove_ David Lothspeich _ Village ManagerWm.... a of Mettawa Represented.............. Village by County Village of Mundelein Bill Emmerich Dir.,Public Works ............. __..... Village of No.... _ .� _....� rth Barrington Kurt Baumann EO City of North Chicago gosh Wheel er EO Vill........_ _............._ _. age of Old Mill Creek Represented by County Appendix A D-1 June 2012 Community _._ .. .. .,.. __. ...... Name... ._.. �_.�_ Title _� ... .� _ Cityof Park City* Ken Magnus Bleck En ineerin /Village Engineer mVillage of Port Barrington _ Mark Rooney EO Village of Riverwoods Rob Du ....... ruing Dir.,Community Services Village of Round Lake Marc Huber ____..... Administrator Village of Round Lake Beach Keith Neitzke Dir.,Public Works _..... ................. __ ...._.. Village of Round Lake Heights Pat Bleck EO Village of Round Lake Park" George Johnson Dir.,Public Works ............... Village of Third Lake Gary Beggan President Village of Tower Lakes Represented by County Village of Vernon Hills John Kalmar Di r.,Community Development Village of Volo Administrator Eric Tison Asst.mmmmmmmmmmmmmITITITITITIT istrator Village of Wadsworth Moses Amidei Administrator Village of Wauconda Bob Devery EO .......................................... ._..................._. ....... ...... City of Waukegan Ron Laubach EO ... ........ ... ....... Village .._ of Winthrop Harbor Jana Lee Clerk/Director of Administration Cityof Zion John Lewis Fire c ...._............ e chief Lake County Kevin Kerrigan LCDOT Lake County Brittany Sloan PB&D _............_ _.._............ ........... Lake County Kent McKenzie LCEMA ........................� ............................... Lake County Evan Moya LCEMA ...................... Lake County Mike Warner SMC ... .. ... Lake Count..........._... ... y Christine Gaynes SMC . ..... Lake County Patty Werner SMC Lake County Susan Vancil SMC _.a.. Lake County Jeff Laramy SMC Countryside Fire Kris Ka.._.. ........ ry ' zian Deputy Fire Chief/Countryside Appendix A D-2 June 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Annex I to the ANHMP A.1 Introduction In 2011, Lake County Local Planning Committee (LPC), coordinated by the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission(SMC) and the Lake County Emergency Management Agency(LCEMA), updated the 2006 Lake County Countywide All Natural Hazards Mitigation (ANHMP). 46 Lake County municipalities participated in the LPC in 2011 to develop the 2012 ANHMP. The 2012 ANHMP was reviewed and approved by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) in March 2012. The City of Park City and the Villages of Lakemoor and Round Lake Park did not participate in the LPC in 2011, and a subsequent 2012 planning effort was conducted to include those municipalities in the 2012 ANHMP. This effort was conducted in April and May 2012, prior to the Lake County Board adoption of the 2012 ANHMP or the municipal adoption of the 2012 ANHMP. Annex 1 to the ANHMP documents the planning process and outcomes of the LPC effort to include .° City of Park City and the Villages of Lakemoor and „ra°i Igo°��°'° rocess Round Lake Park in the 2012 ANHMP and allows step t for a total of 49 Lake County municipalities Organize participating and adopting the 2012 ANHMP. The s� SMC also participated with Lakemoor, Park City Involve the Public and Round Lake Park in the development of this (thissteperonfinues throughout the entireprocess) Annex to ensure that the Annex is complimentary to s13 the 2012 ANHMP, and to support the SMC's role Coordinate with Agencies&Organizations (rhis step contlnues throughout the entire procrss) and responsibilities for countywide watershed, stormwater and floodplain management. Step 4 Assess the Hazard A.2 Development of Annex 1 �'S Evaluate the Problem The FEMA recommended 10-step planning process 1 (discussed in Chapter 2, Section 2.1, and shown in Step Set Goals the box to the right) was used for the development 1 of this Annex. Lakemoor, Park City and Round steps Lake Park were included in a number of countywide Review Mitigation Strategies efforts for the development of the 2012 ANHMP step 8 and the LPC activities, including the public outreach Draft Action Plan and public surveys, agency coordination, and the hazard risk assessment. Section A.4 discusses the Steu9 Adopt the Plan planning steps and chapters that were reviewed, discussed, and reconsidered for Lakemoor, Park s"to City and Round Lake Park. Implement,Evaluate,Revise ANHMP Annex 1 1 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP A.3 Incorporation of Annex 1 into ANHMP Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park will adopt the 2012 ANHMP and this Annex by resolution, and they will participate in future meetings of the LPC and participate. The maintenance and monitoring of the 2012 ANHMP will include the maintenance and monitoring of this Annex. A.4 Review of the 2012 ANHMP Chapters Chapter 1 -Introduction: Chapter 1 presents the characteristics of Lake County and its 51 municipalities. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park were included in the examination of Lake County populations, current and future land use, and critical facilities in Chapter 1 of the 2012 ANHMP. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park concurred with the information presented in Chapter 1 (See Tables 1-xxx and 1-xxx in Chapter 1 of the ANHMP). Each community provided a list of current critical facilities for an update of the County's critical facility database. The location of Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park is shown in the figure on the next page. A portion of Lakemoor is located in McHenry. Chapter 2 - Planning Process: The LPC followed a 10-step planning process to update to update the 2006 ANHMP, and as mentioned above, the same planning process was followed for this annex. Existing plans and programs were reviewed during the planning process. The ANHMP planning effort for Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park does not replace other planning efforts, such as community comprehensive plans, or the Lake County Comprehensive Stormwater Management ANHMP. This ANHMP complements those efforts, and it is intended that the recommendations of the ANHMP be incorporated into other plans as they are developed or created. Table A-1 Local Planning Committee (LPC) Communities and Representatives (See Table 2-1 in Chapter 2 of ANHMP) ..__.... _ . Community Name Title Village .----r_ of Lakemoor __ �.... .... _ _..._ _ of a_ or David Alarcon Village Administrator Village of Round Lake Park �� ......... _........�--...... rk George Johnson Superintendent of Public Works Village of Round Lake Park Frank Village a Engineer City of Park City _..... Kenneth MagnusmmmmITITIT City Engineer The public was invited to participate through several concurrent means, including the LPC meetings, online surveys, paper surveys, press releases, newsletter articles, and the Lake County website. The populations of Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park were included in the 2011-2012 public outreach effort. ANHMP Annex 1 2 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP f � 5 v+a a ao. ro 0�, ` ea � IVPwNN&d1Yr"pP"�AR2G�Pk' m• G v:.9 nR °,"`•.•�.,".° m. ,w.. r OLD U�t CREEK � r J � 'r � SUCH PARK 1r� WA �i�snRrK �WAKF W'd.lA 6fIVdJFPJNURaT z"w µ. Q 0 FrL9UlUC f Attk HS(C S ' t p F�Ny ROtsroaD AAA 4 r Aui;.Pf 'b�, tii WPA,VFA�wti:Y�AnY a m m 4 r� a,�wraw�aa..�Kr a AA Aw r`, Ra�r,rs»rmaE' i 21 6 Vim+^ m 4 W W � A, r,q r ®REElu n."r,?SQC a wEw narvvPl»� w. 1 4APd bµ,Al+ y p m gg d%fwYhfC:lrw TdK jjlyyY/� x, "wVC, won arelcs;f, 7OlWEGi"144Fa"f y, HAWTHORN WOODS LAKE iW?P,W13"011 n Pw»'UOPTbY S0%4N�7tlwq"P i arI kfd dDPWGbz 0a'A!VprRk R'1?k P"db*S'R lid71�4'a W ° � LPAIWd:»�rA Rf�AI?!P 4PmdpAt�„Hd.1Po rdMaYtrA d/ i a W T.E 4�w-0r T.ldFkdM;AW I � vw u f I a bdJ!(,fdL."hfJ&'Y IwC+'w68dP y k 4 M aWa t 1E" ° � assrr,�Aw;+`� ^ � r ARrdNII rOli mw6'a v»d,W#k4dVEk.G✓,Ca a. dt^iRtwdPA^'+uAu Lake County Boundary Labe County, Illinois Open Water Major Transportation Rivers and Strearns Lakes and Streams r�F..xpresswrayA nterstate Municipalities Lake ar US Hicghvmy .....State H4ghway "."" Major Road Major FailLL �iwwnum%wmnwruwwaw�ro rommmwrn�revnwwwwuw�.. iwi�i m�noAuommimm'm'��wm!muwuimrmmimmmnnmummm reaw��mminm uuw�remww�wvuwi A wu ANHMP Annex 1 3 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Chapter 3 -Natural Hazard Risk Assessment: Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park were included in the Chapter 3 Risk Assessment in the 2012 ANHMP. All potential natural hazards that could impact Lake County and Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park were reviewed. The natural hazards presented in Chapter 3 of the ANHMP were evaluated based on what causes them, their likelihood of occurring, and their impact on people,property, critical facilities, and the local economy. As shown in Exhibit 3-1 in Chapter 3 of the 2012 ANHMP and shown in Table 3-7, Lakemoor is within the Fox River Watershed (Low Fox River Tributaries). Park City is within the Skokie River Subwatershed of the North Branch Chicago River Watershed(Table 3-9). Round Lake Park is within the Squaw Creek Subwatershed of the Fox River Watershed and the Mill Creek Subwatershed of the Des Plaines River Watershed(Tables 3-7 and 3-8). Table A-2 shows the natural hazards that are the focus of this ANHMP and provides a summary of the hazards' potential impact on Lake County's health and safety, total assets, and economy from the risk assessment. This table is an excerpt from Table 3-39 in Chapter 3 of the 2012 ANHMP. Table A-2 Summary of Impact on Natural Hazards (See Table 3-39 in Chapter 3 of the ANHMP) Impact on Health Impact on Impact on Critical Economic Natural Hazard and Safe Building Facilities y Impact.—.,.,- Floods Moderate High Moderate High Tornado High High Moderate Moderate Severe Summer Storms Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Severe Winter Storms Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Drought High Moderate Low Moderate Earthquake Low Low Moderate Low Dam Failure Extreme Temperatures High Low Low Low Erosion -- - -- Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park participate in the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP),but the communities do not have any FEMA repetitive flood loss properties. Lakemoor has around 30 active flood insurance policies, Park City has around 30 active flood insurance policies, and Round Lake Park has around 20 active flood insurance policies See Table 5-3 in Chapter 5 of the 2012 ANHMP for more information. ANHMP Annex 1 4 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park concurred on the findings of the Chapter 3 risk assessment and approved on the priority order presented in the ANHMP. The communities agreed that floods, tornados and severe storms can have an impact on their communities and the entire County. The communities also discussed the impact of the July 2011 severe storms and straight-line winds that causes significant damage and wide-spread power outages in Lake County. No recent floods impacted Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park. Erosion was included as a concern for all communities. Table 3-40 in Chapter 3 of the 2012 ANHMP shows a summary of the Lake County natural hazard identification and the table includes Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park. Chapter 4 -Hazard Mitigation Goals and Guidelines: The LPC process for the development of the 2012 ANHMP goals and guidelines was presented to Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park. All concurred with the goals and guidelines as written in Chapter 4 of the 20112 ANHMP. Chapter 5 -Hazard Mitigation Strategies: The following mitigation strategies are considered in the 2012 ANHMP for flood events, tornadoes, severe summer and winter storms, and other natural hazards presented in Table A-2 of this Annex: • Preventative Measures • Property Protection • Natural Resource Protection • Emergency Services • Structural Measures o Public Information The information contained in Chapter was reviewed with Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park and each strategy and potential projects were discussed. Preventive Mitigation Measures: Preventive measures include activities such as building codes and the enforcement of the Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance. Lake County is very strong in preventive measures. Table A-3 shows current planning and preventive actions in Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park(also see Table 5-1 in Chapter 5 of the 2012 ANHMP)that are generally are applicable to the natural hazards that can impact Lake County. Table A-3 (See Table 5-1 in Chapter 2 of ANHMP) Compre- Storm- Capital Sub- Historical hensive water Mgmt. Improve- Land Use Zoning division Preservation Community Plan Plan ment Plan Plan Only Ordinance Ordinance Ordinance Village of Lakemoor Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ( ) � CID 170915 City of Park City Yes Yes (CID 170386) Village of Round Lake Park Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes (CID 170391) wvxwnwwuwnm wm rvrvmi�iu�wumwwww� omm�i�au �®�owmmnm�m www mm�mmm�imum.�mmimmmw .mmua ANHMP Annex 1 5 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP As highlighted in the 2012 ANHMP, the SMC is responsible for watershed, stormwater and floodplain management throughout the County. For the implementation of the Lake County Watershed Development Ordinance (WDO), Round Lake Park is a certified community(see Section 5.1.2 in Chapter 5 of the 2012 ANHMP). Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park implement building codes which provide mitigation of tornadoes, severe storms and earthquake damage for constructed buildings and manufactured homes. Property Protection Mitigation Measures: Property protection mitigation measures are used to modify buildings or property subject to existing damage. SMC implements a voluntary floodplain acquisition program that gives priority to repetitive loss properties. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park do not currently have any repetitive loss properties. However, Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park recognized that for flood and other hazards, many measures can be implemented by the property owners, so appropriate government activities should include public information, technical assistance and financial support. The communities also recognize their need to place emphasis on the protection critical facilities and their vulnerability to wind and severe storm hazards. This was highlighted by the storm and wind events of July 2011. The communities also discussed the importance of sheltering during tornado events and other severe wind events, and opportunities for additional sheltering throughout their communities should be identified. Natural Resource Protection: Natural resource protection activities are aimed at preserving (or in some cases restoring)natural areas. They include preserving wetlands, control of erosion and sedimentation, stream restoration, and urban forestry. Urban forestry programs are encouraged to protect utility lines during wind and ice storms. Emergency Management: The LPC called for a better understanding of flood and other hazards to improve emergency management—preparedness, response and recovery. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park supported this effort and stated the need for more coordinated communication amongst communities, agencies, and utility providers. Structural Mitigation Projects: Structural mitigation projects, such as the regional detention basins are still important within the County's comprehensive watershed management program. Additional watershed studies are still needed. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park agreed with the LPC recommendation for each community to establish a formal and regular program of drainage system maintenance. There is also interest in sources of funding for streambank stabilization or erosion protection. Public Information: The LPC identified numerous subject areas that would benefit from a coordinated public information program, including safe rooms, property protection, understanding floods, and cooling and warming centers. Lakemoor, Park City and Round ANHMP Annex 1 6 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Lake Park are interested in common set of public information materials be developed for use throughout Lake County communities. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park were included in tables and data included in Chapter 5 of the 2012 ANHMP. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park concurred with the recommendations made in Chapter 5 of the 2012 ANHMP for each of the six mitigation categories discussed above. Chapter 6 -Mitigation Action Plan: The action plan included in the 2012 ANHMP outlines the recommended activities and initiatives to be implemented over the next five years. It is understood that implementation is contingent on the availability of resources (staff and funding). The action plan identifies who is responsible for implementing the action items, and when they are to be done. Mitigation actions are not limited to those listed in the action ANHMP. Other recommendations in this ANHMP (Chapter 5) should be implemented as opportunities arise. There are 23 action items included in the 2012 ANHMP update. The first two action items are administrative. The first action item calls for the formal adoption of this ANHMP. Formal adoption is a requirement for recognition of the ANHMP by mitigation funding programs. The LPC will provide the mechanism and a vehicle for the ANHMP to be implemented, monitored, evaluated and updated, and for continued public involvement. The LPC will report to the County Board and municipal councils and boards, annually, and participate in the next five year update. The other action items are mitigation program items. Many are ongoing activities of stormwater management and emergency management offices and agencies. The action items were prioritized by the LPC based on action that they felt should be implemented countywide and which each municipality should undertake. Table 6-1 in Chapter 6 of the 2012 ANHMP summarizes the action items and the responsible agencies. All action items were accepted by Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park, however several action items are highlighted below as community-specific action items. Village o1`Lak.em,00r 2012 ANHMP Action Item 1: Plan Adoption 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 4: SMC Flood Mitigation Projects: Item b,priority actions for the Fox River Watershed in the next five years include floodplain remapping/studies for Fish Lake Drain, Sequoit Creek, Squaw Creek, and Round Lake Drain/Eagle Creek/Long Lake. 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 9: Property Protection Projects: Properties that are exposed to flood damage and severe storms throughout Lake County should be protected through property protection measures where regional structural projects are not feasible. mnu�iwmmm uuwwruuwrrvu�wwow�urvmw— mmno �w wi��nw�ervrrowwr�oww wmxeawmwwurruww mmmrorowru.�wmwwwrow�in. ANHMP Annex 1 7 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 13: Continued Implementation of the WDO and NFIP Requirements 2012 ANHMP -Action Item 18: Alternate Power Sources for Critical Facilities and Shelters Annex 1 -Action Item 24: Participate in McHenry County Watershed Planning Efforts: Lakemoor should participate in any watershed studies for the Lilly Lake and Sullivan Lake subwatershed areas in McHenry County should they be pursued by McHenry County. The deadline for this effort is dependent on McHenry County resources, and costs will be evaluated by the McHenry County Stormwater Division. Benefits include the wise development of land to protect the watersheds and to reduce potential flood damage. Annex 1 -Action Item 25: Property Protection Projects in McHenry County: Properties that are exposed to flood damage and severe storms throughout Lakemoor in McHenry County should be protected through property protection measures where regional structural projects are not feasible. See Action Item 9 for deadline, costs and benefits. Citv of Park Cit 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 1: Plan Adoption 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 9: Property Protection Projects -Properties that are exposed to flood damage and severe storms throughout Lake County should be protected through property protection measures where regional structural projects are not feasible. 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 13: Continued Implementation of the WDO and NFIP Requirements—Though this action item, Park City should strive to ensure that all manufactured homes are protected from flood and wind hazards. 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 18: Alternate Power Sources for Critical Facilities and Shelters Annex 1 -Action Item 26: Park City should assess sheltering needs with available staff and other resources as they become available. Deadline should be within the next five years. Costs include staff time and benefits include the protection of life and property. Village of Round Labe Park 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 1: Plan Adoption 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 4: SMC Flood Mitigation Projects: Item b, priority actions for the Fox River Watershed in the next five years include floodplain ANHMP Annex 1 8 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP remapping/studies for Fish Lake Drain, Sequoit Creek, Squaw Creek, and Round Lake Drain/Eagle Creek/Long Lake. 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 9: Property Protection Projects: Properties that are exposed to flood damage and severe storms throughout Lake County should be protected through property protection measures where regional structural projects are not feasible. 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 13: Continued Implementation of the WDO and NFIP Requirements 2012 ANHMP-Action Item 18: Alternate Power Sources for Critical Facilities and Shelters A.S. ANHMP and Annex 1 Adoption The 2012 ANHMP and this Annex to the 2012 ANHMP serves to recommend mitigation measures for Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park. Adoption is a requirement for recognition of the ANHMP by FEMA for mitigation funding programs. The adoption of the 2012 ANHMP and this Annex will be done by resolution of the County Board, the city council or board of trustees of Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park. The municipal resolutions will adopt each action item that is pertinent to the community and assigns a person responsible for it. With adoption,the County and each municipality are individually eligible to apply for FEMA mitigation grant funding. Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park will participate in future meetings of the LPC and participate. A.6 Summary This 2012 update to the ANHMP was developed by the Lake County LPC as a multi- jurisdictional ANHMP to meet federal mitigation planning requirements. The 2012 ANHMP updated the examination of natural hazards facing Lake County, establishes mitigation goals, evaluates and highlights the existing mitigation activities underway in Lake County, and recommends a mitigation action ANHMP for the County and municipalities to undertake in the next five years. These efforts included Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park. This Annex to the 2012 ANHMP documents the participation in the mitigation planning process for Lakemoor, Park City and Round Lake Park. The mitigation efforts included in the 2012 ANHMP and this Annex are for the purpose of projecting people,property and other assets of Lake County. Some action items are ongoing efforts; others are new. Implementation of all action items is contingent on the availability of staff and funding. The ANHMP and this Annex will be implemented and maintained through both countywide and individual initiatives, as funding and resources become available. The maintenance and monitoring of the 2012 ANHMP will include the maintenance and monitoring of this Annex. uo��ammo�mnmrm, im m�ur mremmmammmwuu wmwW weolomimnmmmmnmwrm'rmmmmwmmmmmwmrmwrrorom m... r. mwwm w✓m��avm'rm,�m: ANHMP Annex 1 9 DRAFT May 2012 Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation ANHMP Table A-4 Lake County 2012 ANHMP Hazard Mitigation Action Items (See Table 6-1 in Chapter 6 of ANHMP) ... ...... Action Item To Be Implemented By: ... ........ ..........._ Lake Lake Lake Lake Municipal Count Count Count Count Boards& Municipal Other y y y y p Stakeholders Action Item: Board SMC EMA PB&D Councils StaffmmmmmITIT ITITITITITITITIT 1. Plan Adoption ✓ ✓ 2. Plan Monitoring and Maintenance ✓ ✓ ✓ .....................- ._..... ... 3. Improve Natural Hazards Public ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Information Efforts 4.SMC Flood Mitigation Projects ✓ ✓ ......_... _ ............_� 5.Development of Flood Stage Maps ✓ ✓ 6. Property Protection Checklist ✓ ✓ ......._ 7. Improve Emergency Response and ✓ ✓ ✓ Develop Assessment Teams ............ ......._.....� _ _.... 8. Incorporate ANHMP into Other County ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ and Municipal Plans 9. Property Protection Projects ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ........ ......... 10. Continue to map natural hazard impacts and continue vulnerability ✓ Vol assessments 11. Review and Mitigation of Critical ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Facilities 12. Seek Mitigation Grant Funding for Additional Mitigation Planning and Cost ✓ ✓ Beneficial Projects �.... 13.Continued Implementation of the ✓ ✓ ✓ WDO and NFIP Requirements 14. Improve Capacity of Drainage ✓ ✓ Systems 15 Implement Maintenance Programs for ✓ ✓ Drainage Systems Recovery Information Sharing and Collaboration ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 17. Continue Work for NIMS Compliance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 18. Alternate Power Sources ........... _.. for Critical ✓ ✓ ✓ Facilities and Shelters 19. Improve Building Codes _ WWITITITITIT an p g d Building ✓ ✓ Code Enforcement 20. _ � .... Community Rating System ✓ ✓ Participation 21. Reduce Inowand Infiltration to Protect Against Backups ✓ 22. Urban Forestry-Participation in Tree ✓ City USA 23. Participation in Storm Ready ✓ ✓ ANHMP Annex 1 10 DRAFT May 2012 Ap pendix ix iic Information Activities Below are samples of public information and public involvement activities that were used during the development of the 2011 ANHMP update, including: • Press releases and web site articles • Web site information • Lake County e-newsletter • Survey Monkey summary • Public meeting and public comment announcements • Public meeting held on September 22, 2011 • Frequently asked questions 1. Sample Press Releases and Web Site Postings: PRESS RELEASE FOR MORE INFORMATION,CONTACT: Susan Vancil,SMC Communications Manager, (847)377-7714 LAKE COUNTY COMMUNITIES UPDATING COUNTYWIDE NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN The Local Planning Committee to update the Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan will meet on Wed.,June 15, 11 a.m.at the Lake County Central Permit Facility,500 W.Winchester Rd.,2nd floor conference room, Libertyville.At the meeting,the LPC will identify community hazard priorities and how to fund and implement potential mitigation measures. The Federal Emergency Management Agency requires the plan be updated every 5years.All Lake County communities and the public are invited to participate in the process.Once the plan is approved and adopted by the communities and Lake County they are eligible for pre-and post-disaster funding to reduce future damages. The update process is coordinated by the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC) and the Lake County Emergency Management Agency(LCEMA)and funded by a$72,000 grant from the Illinois Emergency Management Agency. A natural hazards mitigation plan identifies activities that can be undertaken by both the public and private sectors to reduce safety hazards, health hazards, and property damage caused by natural hazards. Lake County's plan focuses on the natural hazards that it faces including floods,thunderstorms,tornadoes and winter/ice storms.An example grant program the county is eligible for is the voluntary floodplain buyout program where over$6 million in grants have funded buyouts across the county.The LPC meetings are open to the public. For more information or to get on the meeting distribution list,call SMC at(847) 377-7714. -end- uuMNiaaa w wuuw'Auu A wamw uvw'vwwwuwwocam'w wwww udw'wti wmmuoww�wwwwuuwuw�wwww �wwmudouwW iumKn iwgww wmmmvmmuwmam ww,�il uw.w'waarmmcewtiwomumummw 'au Appendix B B-1 2. Web Site Information: n -' ,✓ I r r�fr ^fi��rI �i d�ilo � U � � ti 4 Lake County All-Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 60-®ay Public Cornmenf Period undo r!ay for Draft Upa®[e Plan ry wing 4o0, i'N&rtik/'�ir�R%p4Vrpu>/P'�Zan<nw.'nl'"til�t oy'a,y.I.CF'PoI-,.,nod rawCrb A%MAr Vuolou m1_,vl6Y% ,,'yxtar2nenrRPanndPorthemuili- uEtP1clitOnit U -r:"OUNt"'Kh.eIof Rl"Ar"'Af 1`r�yad9ll'ar6Y»lylry,uryrt9are"9':h2VAf.FEVt OPI,V II P7 Om 3�^olWk�O ue Upaarea every` Iial's jz ww4ftN,,,WW4R11 h aw'Aft'191lM10"1111lni, WIII,`rj"%Iwgvufib I'1611, I O,aWd tY19Pr,,;Aon Wrii^1:, I,DIM11A017,Wil bet V!PiIild VMvilgh OCL_rYII1 lAb+YY-TAH Tand 01 W,iV ilni"ILnu,1 Fa'PMw4.RYsan Ier II SYI Y,ryaWq E 47^961-E N7 a r?t HFlk 8I r ,Y 00 Vi nqn q,,"r RC Owiv ,,j LPGd"IM flaw IL""W,16, ewr Ir tG9'�iIB�nP ti9 Netlul Cb Ftz Jr�r �rFC.6. 2,1-3P-m.. t,a.✓fwMrdNlrqummn21IP�r�..ralht,5t_P'+atrrin.oluaL_ ,uarrrcvr.run9ntrtnmu"Innrox5ilMY,elf.,daa�varic Draft Plan Chapters m Cv HPDFfornlet206K81 ® Turla of Cantent>pDF format 92h'Si � �. Ez h zr fpDFfarmal224h61 3. Lake County eNewsletter: I ��,� mil" Preparedness - We Need Your tnput Lake County residents are invited to complete "he P" h9 Your input `:, help 1 elp ._...mm.w, Lake County prioritize natural hazards that could impact residents and determine howto be better prepared for emergencies. Lake County local government agencies are in the process of updating the Lake County All Natural Hazards r0itigation Flan. The [Aitigation Plan Ifs,, identifies activities and projects to reduce the damages caused by natural hazards such as tornadoes. floods. and severe summer and ,v.rinter Mors, YM' .Nm wmti IWWWWW IMI 'a�IIW®W��mNNmmmicev'WiaMIIOWWN'WW�WVWWIYIW'.nWlu'tlmma'aNhWM'RIPI�YVYWWYwiw4W.�lAIN4�MIa�WMMWI�WGp.NYAfMM1M��W'.N� WWUWI IM�WIW'�YMM'Y41'upfi�uuriv�WlvlhlM' Appendix B B-2 4. Survey Monkey Summary: Summary of "Survey Monkey" Findings A ten question survey was provided to Lake County residents online and on paper. The online version was available at "Survey Monkey" and the paper survey was provided at municipal buildings. A summary of the survey results are provided after the questions below. Q1. Welcome to the Public Input Survey for the Update of the Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan! We appreciate your time. First, what community do you live in? 106 responses from 15 municipalities and unincorporated Lake County. Q2. In approximately the past 10 years, have you or someone in your household experienced a natural disaster? Check all that apply. Winter Storm 80% of respondents Severe Summer Storm 59% of respondents Extreme Heat 45% of respondents Flood 23% of respondents Sewer Backup 7%of respondents Drought 7%of respondents Tornado less than 5% Earthquake less than 5% Other less than 5% Q3. What natural hazards concern you the most FOR YOUR FAMILY? Results shown by most concern to least concern. Tornado 66% of respondents High wind/microburst 55% of respondents Snow storm 40% of respondents Flood 39% of respondents Lightning 36% of respondents Groundwater 35% of respondents Ice storm 33% of respondents Thunderstorm 25% of respondents Extreme cold 22% of respondents Hail 22% of respondents Extreme heat 20% of respondents Sewer backup 19% of respondents Drought 4%of respondents Earthquake 4%of respondents Severe shoreline erosion I%of respondents Dam Failure 0%of respondents Other 0%of respondents Q4. What natural hazards concern you the most FOR YOUR COMMUNITY? Results shown by most concern to least concern. Appendix B B-3 Tornado 67% of respondents Flood 61% of respondents High wind/microburst 57% of respondents Snow storm 45% of respondents Ice storm 33% of respondents Lightning 32% of respondents Groundwater 30% of respondents Thunderstorm 26% of respondents Extreme heat 19% of respondents Sewer backup 17% of respondents Extreme cold 15% of respondents Hail 13% of respondents Drought 8%of respondents Earthquake 7%of respondents Severe shoreline erosion 3%of respondents Dam Failure 3%of respondents Other 1%of respondents Q5. How prepared do YOU feel for natural hazards likely to occur within Lake County? Not at all prepared 15%of respondents Somewhatprepared 45% of respondents Adequately prepared 26%of respondents Well prepared 6%of respondents Very well prepared 8%of respondents Q6. What steps have you or someone in your household taken to prepare for a natural disaster? Check all that apply. Flashlight 97%of respondents Batteries 86%of respondents Fire extinguisher 73%of respondents Medical supplies First Aid Kit 63%of respondents Water 56%of respondents Food 51%of respondents Battery powered radio 46%of respondents Received First Aid/CPR training 38%of respondents Practiced afire escape plan 27%of respondents Discussed utility shutoffs 26%of respondents Other 11%of respondents Q7. What are the most effective ways for you to receive information on how to protect your household and property from damage due to natural disasters? Check all that apply. Wehsites 72%of respondents Television 58%of respondents Radio 40%of respondents Fact sheet/brochure 40%of respondents Municipal/County Government 37%of respondents Mail 35%of respondents Fire Department/Law Enforcement 24%of respondents Appendix B B-4 Newspapers 21%of respondents Public Health Department 15%of respondents Schools IS%of respondents Public Workshops/Meetings 9%of respondents TwitterlFacebook 8%of respondents Other 6%of respondents Extension Service I%of respondents Q8. How do you feel your community is doing to make people aware of the natural hazards that they may face? Excellent 7%of respondents Good 40% of respondents Fair 32%of respondents Poor 12%of respondents None 9%of respondents Q9. Lake County and participating municipalities are currently updating the Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. Do you have any questions or comments about the Plan or the process? There were 25 responses to this question. Many respondents noted that they had never heard of hazard mitigation or that the topic was very new to them. Numerous people were interested is seeing the ANHMP. People requested more information on warnings and sirens. Other folks requested text alerts or social media information about hazards and mitigation. Q10. If you would like to learn more about the All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan update process, please provide your e-mail address below. Thirty-two respondents provided their e-mail address. Appendix B B-S 5. Public meeting held on September 22, 2011 , r a Lake County Hazard Mitigation Local Planning Committee Thursday,September 22,20111 1:00 p.m. Lake County Building,18 N.County Street,Waukegan,IL Agenda 1. Introductions The Planning Process 2. Overview of Draft 2011 All Natural Hazards 0-91*�� Mitigation Plan (ANHMP) j s� 3. Public Comment 4. Review of the Action Items(ANHMP Section 6a ) Coardkaale With Agri rirr%&Orgu dm dons (Mis xr�marMiassrrs rarxaar�rtwaxr eRc xuora+m rn«nrr,:xi�t 5. Overview of Mitigation Grant Programs SiV 4 Ae the Razard 6. Next Steps: 1 a. IEMA/FEMA Review&Approval Evaluate the Pmblcai b. Adoption Steps S (I Set Gows 7. Adjourn xa� �os��an� s des ayes 8 Dmfi AcEU=Pfau 4, Public comment period will be open until October 4,2011, Adap Ply, Please submit comments to the Lake County SMC at: fro SVancil@lakeeountyil.gov U�Iemeat Eveluat Rev'se or Susan Vancil Lake County SMC 500 W.Winchester Road,Suite 201 Libertyville,IL 60048 The draft ANHMP is available for viewing at Lake County website: ta, f v w�.6 Yk�Cro br; i •o , ar°rumar krr�E=i vro ti9a�forrrrerwterrn�=Ir�r,44—�—rl ili.�a f rtE6�a�.?sd�tl grog �; Appendix B B-6 6. Frequently asked questions Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan — 2011 Update Frequently Asked Questions (ANHMP Update FAQs) .ter, U+A/rtrr✓x;.. aiw. „��6 ^' •7 June 2012 1. What is the Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan? The Lake County All Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (ANHMP)is a plan that addresses natural hazards that may impact Lake County, such as floods, severe summer storms, winter storms and tornadoes, and identifies activities that can be undertaken by both the public and the private sectors to reduce safety hazards, health hazards, and property damage caused by natural hazards. While the ANHMP was developed countywide, it is considered to be a "multi-jurisdictional plan." 2. Why was the ANHMP developed? Having an adopted mitigation plan allows Lake County and participating Lake County municipalities to be eligible for mitigation grant funds from the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA). The ANHMP was developed to fulfill the federal mitigation planning requirements of Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and the Stafford Act for funding under the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA)grant programs. The ANHMP is also eligible for credit for communities that participate in FEMA's Community Rating System (CRS) under the National Flood Insurance Program. 3. Who developed the ANHMP? The ANHMP was developed through a mitigation planning committee that included Lake County, participating Lake County municipalities and other stakeholders, and through the assistance of a planning consultant. The mitigation planning committee (now called the Local Planning Committee or LPC)was established as a permanent advisory body to Lake County in 2006 and has been meeting annually. 4. Why update the ANHMP? FEMA requires hazard mitigation plans to be updated and re-adopted every five (5) years. 5. What was the update "process"? Our update process included four meetings of the LPC to review the ANHMP's goals and action items, and the draft updated plan. We also requested information from municipalities regarding mitigation activities of the past five years. A draft of the updated ANHMP was made available for public review and a public hearing/meeting was held on September 22, 2011. Public comments were collected and IEMA and FEMA have reviewed and approved the plan. The County and participating municipalities must adopt the updated ANHMP. The final plan is available at: litt: /lw wvr Vakeceunt il. ov/Siormwat rlFloodlnformatuon/RggA zardC itia tign/Pa ge s/'ANP1MP.asgx. A meeting to develop Annex 1 to the ANHMP was also held in May 2012 to include additional Lake County municipalities. 6. The ANHMP is considered multi jurisdictional. Is this the same as "countywide"? No, the ANHMP is not a countywide plan like the Lake County Stormwater Management Plan. FEMA allows for the multi jurisdictional development of hazard mitigation plans. Each government agency must adopt and implement the ANHMP for its own purposes. The County Board adoption of the ANHMP is for Appendix B B-7 unincorporated areas of the County. Each municipality must adopt the ANHMP for themselves. 7. How do we adopt the ANHMP? By resolution. Communities have been provided with a sample adoption resolution and instructions on where to send a copy of the resolution for IEMA and FEMA's records. 8. If we don't adopt the 2012 ANHMP will our community is eligible for IEMA/FEMA disaster assistance following a disaster declaration for Lake County? Yes. This ANHMP is for the mitigation grant purposes. It is not tied to disaster assistance. Recognize that often mitigation projects come to light following a disaster. It is prudent to have an adopted mitigation plan. 9. Who will implement the Mitigation Plan? Each municipality, agency and institution that adopts the Mitigation Plan will implement the Mitigation Plan, according to the resolution passed, and as resources (staff time and funding) become available. Ideally,there will be some joint efforts, through the Mitigation Committee, with the County, municipalities and townships to implement mitigation actions. An example of a joint effort may be the development of common public information materials. 10. What are the types of mitigation grants available? Planning grants and project grants. Examples of mitigation planning grants would be for the study of repetitive flood loss areas, or the evaluation of critical facilities to determine if they are disaster resistant. Examples of mitigation project grants would be for floodplain property acquisitions, or construction of a tornado shelter at a senior care facility. All plans and projects are funded 75% by FEMA and 25% by the community or agency. 11. How do we apply for a mitigation grant? Mitigation grants are applied for through the IEMA. An online"eGrant" application is used. Communities can contact Ron Davis, the State Hazard Mitigation Officer at IEMA, at 217-782-8719 (ron.davis illinois, o )for more information. 12. What is the FEMA web site for hazard mitigation grants programs? For more information about FEMA mitigation grant programs, or HMA, visit: htt�r:l�±wwavr,Lema.gov/g_qye,rnrrren(/qEaotlhma/index.shtm Also, visit IEMA's web site at: hft:t/ww .state.il.ushegL ipla�nina 1 alann�n 13. How can I learn more about the Community Rating System (CRS)? Information on the CRS can be found at FEMA's web site: htt ,iiwww.fema oov/bus rrwess fi)fi)lc� , hta 14. Who do we contact about the ANHMP update? Feel free to contact Susan Vancil of the SMC at mralli rll��,,m� or 847-377-7714. Appendix B B-8 Appendix C. Progress on 2006 Action la Comparison to Current Action, la As discussed in Chapter 6, The 2005 Planning Team identified high priority actions for the 2006 ANHMP (Section 6) and community specific action items in Appendix Q. In the 2006 ANHMP, action items were prioritized within each hazard; this was not done in this 2012 update. Prioritization was done with the recognition that mitigation actions can potentially address more than one hazard. Three priority actions were highlighted in the 2006 ANHMP as high priority for the 5-year update (i.e., this 2012 update): • Identify the number and type of existing structures, infrastructure and critical facilities at risk—Coordinator, Lake County Emergency Management Agency; • Identify the number and type of future structures, infrastructure and critical facilities at risk—Coordinator, Lake County Emergency Management Agency; • Identify the potential dollar losses from vulnerable hazards—Coordinator, Lake County Emergency Management Agency; These items were considered in this 2012 update of the risk assessment in Chapter 3. In the 2006 ANHMP, 25 other high priority action items were identified and prioritized. These 25 items will be reported on in Table C-1 and translated into the 2011 action plan. All action items from the 2006 ANHMP were reviewed by the LPC, including the communities- specific items. New action items were also discussed and all action items were reprioritized for the 2012 update. For this 2012, the LPC discussed the effectiveness of the action items in the former Section 6 and Appendix Q at the July LPC meeting and at the September 2011 public meeting. There was concurrence that with the countywide implementation of floodplain and stormwater management through the SMC, with the SMC's ability to implement watershed based or multi-community mitigation projects, and with the countywide efforts of the LCEMA, a comprehensive action plan should be developed. There was recognition that all communities involved in this ANHMP update share common municipal-level mitigation action items, with the exception of a few communities that are not subject to riverine flooding. Community representatives were asked to submit specific community action items, and these items were addressed the items in Section 6.2 of this ANHMP. Appendix C 1 June 2012 N E 0 ................... ° a 0 p o m w '0 CD a) m ° m o U ¢ � WCM .0 LO L U N D_ f O E O U C) O r N C N (U fU C U 'O L °o Q ° ° Q cU t E� y v w o C� m o ° O m c E c c C N co U E N O N N N N p N p N N N X,`� m N p > N ...Q ,,, n�... N N N x X N N 2 3 3 a o E > E p c ITIT � cn Z) W Lo U cn <n W w rn U � Z..._ Z W a> In o a, ......... ----------- fA CL D1 C I-L f6 Z W c cm Q C = m 'D ° ° 0 f6 Q (0 C N U N 0 m ° 00. fA U c> m U m @ w (6 C co L Cb O c d) O C d IC C..., C O C O N O O N p O p fY1 c d w N coy '6 N16 p a I 'cc -O N C N N (n 0 C C T '. f0 w .6 O w U '° Co - C f U R a c (c6 U y N C w O C N c E C 7- cC f6 N d rn CD CL ma o m `° 3 a C N cc w a`� aa)=p E cca m c U �T O o m E� � 0 o a> ° U c c a -0 U ° Z w m c d o a>Y c v °a o a> ° c >c Q > E p o c ° E Q Q > > O O p c > p O N 7 f0 ._ E , o Q E Q a� y a Q CO a m c a� E N c c Q Q U m c 7 > E N p O m m E (n Ec pc ° E Ey V N a a N �L U o v �' 3 T p N nj N pj G1 r N M CDQ !O 0) U V rU NU ram' r N N N a C p (0 C �f IC c E d O m 0).2 v) m 0) 01 C C C y ;„ C C C C C �+O m >' >' 01 O Q m U O V) C COCwO CC C ZmN0 Z 0 0*0 C l OT 0 0 0 0 Z a ` U p N w U C .0 CD T N c o E a c N r E U C N Q d U N a) co (6 c E c N O E U ai m Y c n P (D f6 O U w`C U .001 p@ i O N U E O d _0 caN U N c a) -- 6 � �' U 3 a E Qc f c •p L O O N >. E ca m LL O O p g ca V fb U Q U N O N m C N N_2 Q U C U E 7 tm O O N E - •� L O U N d U m (6 Q - w (0 10 p f6 Q U C i N V L Q p"0 1; d E 0 a c T L c c 3 3 CO �O O W•U O `� N p co L) I O= O U C C N C C d N O c O N C w C @ N O 'p 0 p E U O O U N C O7 O N m 3 �- L (EO O ° ;.. o n�' c c: a E O E an d cuLL U p 7 m >:2 U cuc L T '° L (D C L N 7 U N U � C N C %U N U O 'F > U L d C > E U '6 Q U L U C � L V O N 7 2 N N ° ^d 0 C 6 U � C U p U U 0 2 U d � w o W 0 (n a� cu d W y v W 0 cpi o y m a c a r NT (h (6 'cY 47 0 ° fD f� 00 W r fV r J s Q N O .......... co ca 00 j V) U) m N a) a) a) a) N O O O O O O .� Q Q Q Q C — — m O O _ O O C) d d N O a) O C) IL d N N E 3 'D a) -0 4) m (D 3 3 a) a) � 3 3 3 n a) a a) (D a) O o a) a) a (D (DJ U) J fn Z) cn U) U) J J U) (n Z) Z Z ca 41cn 7 a o U co ca C U rn Q) c V d o U) U m c y _ v N m Q Y O Q Q U y a) y o s c 0 a o ns U IL m a o o) a o d 3 ai = Z v — in Q p N m a ILm a cm > > aci c t: o d V C O N a) Q E Z) ° c) 2 r ¢ ——0a �'? 0 N �L7 ao W N L6 r � R U) N _f c c d C d a `a `a E (D rn o) o) rn o) D) 0) v) a c- rn a d � c c c c � c c c c •�, '3 c O O O O >+ O O O O O T C N rn o) o) m o) rn o) tm c c o) c 0 C c c C O c c c c O C O O i C O O O O Z O O O O O Z a .. ,. .. .._., ................. ..... _........ ..............' ...... Q � Q 46 a LU �, o Q) O r N O N U U O U (n a) d C o o w c E (n m G U N O (U6 m N C r CD L a7 •— O >, as a) N C G= a) LL co 0 O d a3 c N a cc cc E cn W mCh a) w i+ 7 f0 C C ` U w C a) of 2 m Q — fa 3 Q m °w > a' c E �' -o o E r =I a d 0 L m p v) a m m 2 w o .2 c w o) d > 0 U) min c ur m c c N c 1 o >_ c Y U O70 — w O m E m co c o CD U a) CIF 6 U E j N 30 c - t � 3 :O LL N a) Q 'a3 a) O LL o N f _rn o (n Z) > 0 U) m 0) L C L N W'O a) a a) U N -L O C .J y m o a) c o a) (D E E U m o U o cu CV dM a a`) m ° �N c o � Nc'm f CD cp ° r (D W w U) IL W i CmL _ a) L6 0.a N(n(nN N Q . ... }o <m m r }� � ( \ k k } ) V 4) 76 ° ( E T \ i / ¥ )5 a } eLL )§ 6 CL .2 /\ / ) a § cm o = « ® / 0 §_ ) & o § a ƒ o ; ) _ § / E 0�\ - D \\. } ) k k \ § k . § / / \ } � \ �� ° � ■ ■� ) 2 ; G cm o ) § U a m f ■� } C4 ( { ■ } m �� } § � § E C � } iU \r \ t � �� Appendix D Resolutions and FEMA Approval [To be inserted.] Appendix F D-1 April 2012